Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) vs Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning)
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning) by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-27.
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallbac… scores 40.4 points higher (56.0 vs 15.6) but costs 6.1× as much to run the benchmark ($4057 vs $661; flagship vs premium cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallbac… when you need intelligence above 15.6, and Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning) when 15.6 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) | Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 56.0 | 15.6 | −72.1% Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Re… is 72.1% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $4,056.65 | $661.29 | −83.7% Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Re… is 83.7% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 127.77s | 21.24s | −83.4% Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Re… is 83.4% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $4.00 / $20.0 | $0.40 / $3.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning) vs Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback): 72.1% less intelligence, 83.7% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 83.4% faster end-to-end.
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (High) scores 50.20 for $521.
Compare something else
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5-xhigh/qwen3-5-122b-a10b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5-xhigh/qwen3-5-122b-a10b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill