Claude Opus 5 (Low) vs Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5 (Low) by Anthropic or Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5 (Low) scores 5.7 points higher (39.4 vs 33.7) but costs 1.2× as much to run the benchmark ($1561 vs $1336; both premium class). Pick Claude Opus 5 (Low) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh).
| Metric | Claude Opus 5 (Low) | Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 39.4 | 33.7 | −14.5% Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) is 14.5% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,560.91 | $1,336.09 | −14.4% Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) is 14.4% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 11.37s | 60.72s | +434.0% Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) is 434.0% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $5.00 / $25.0 | $0.50 / $3.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) vs Claude Opus 5 (Low): 14.5% less intelligence, 14.4% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 434.0% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5 (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
- Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
Claude Opus 5 (Low)Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh)Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-low/qwen3-8-27b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-low/qwen3-8-27b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill