Compare / head-to-head
Claude Opus 5.5vs
Qwen3.5 2B
Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen3.5 2B do not yet share a public benchmark, so quality cannot be compared apples-to-apples. Claude Opus 5.5 has the larger context window (1M tokens).
Benchmarks from cited public sources; pricing from official pages; status from official provider feeds.
Shared benchmarks
0
no overlap yet
Cheaper per token
—
list price, input + output
Larger context
Claude Opus 5.5
1M tokens
Providers
2 providers
Anthropic · Qwen
Claude Opus 5.5
Anthropic · released 2026-09-22
textvision
Qwen3.5 2B
Qwen · released 2026-03-02
textvisionvideo
- Context
- 262K
- Max out
- —
- Input /1M
- —
- Output /1M
- —
- Cached /1M
- —
- Scores
- 16 · 5 core
Quality
Benchmark matrix
0 shared · 34 only Claude Opus 5.5 · 16 only Qwen3.5 2B| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Qwen3.5 2B | Δ | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reported by both · 0 | ||||
| No public benchmark is reported for both models yet. | ||||
| Only Claude Opus 5.5 reports · 34 | ||||
| GPQA Diamond | 90.6% ↗epoch run | not reported | — | — |
| LMArena Elo | 1503.7 ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| APEX-Agents (Mercor) | 73.5% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| AutomationBench 1.0.6 | 40% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| Chartography (with tools) | 89% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| CursorBench 4.0 | 57.8% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| EBR-bench (Epoch AI run) | 71.4% ↗epoch run | not reported | — | — |
| FrontierCode v1.1 (Main) | 54.4% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 v2 (Epoch AI run) | 95% ↗epoch run | not reported | — | — |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 v2 (Epoch AI run) | 91.2% ↗epoch run | not reported | — | — |
| FrontierSWE V2 (Proximal Labs) | 62.3% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| Furniture Assembly (Epoch AI run) | 83.3% ↗epoch run | not reported | — | — |
| GDPval-AA v2.1 | 1846 ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam (with tools) | 67.7% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| LiveBench Agentic Coding (LiveBench) | 71.7% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| LiveBench Coding (LiveBench) | 89.3% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis (LiveBench) | 80.3% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| LiveBench Instruction Following (LiveBench) | 67% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| LiveBench Language (LiveBench) | 86.3% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| LiveBench Mathematics (LiveBench) | 97.1% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning (LiveBench) | 92.2% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| LMArena Agent (LMArena) | 0.1382 ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| LMArena WebDev (LMArena) | 1815.4 ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| MirrorCode (Epoch AI run) | 77.4% ↗epoch run | not reported | — | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles (Epoch AI run) | 71% ↗epoch run | not reported | — | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 (partial) | 81.8% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 (Epoch AI run) | 100% ↗epoch run | not reported | — | — |
| SAGE (Vals AI) | 45.8% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| SimpleBench (SimpleBench) | 88.4% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 72.2% ↗epoch run | not reported | — | — |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 | 66.4% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals AI) | 65.2% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| Terminal-Bench Science 0.1 | 58.7% ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 (Andon Labs) | 9235.25 ↗ | not reported | — | — |
| Only Qwen3.5 2B reports · 16 | ||||
| BFCL-V4 (thinking) | not reported | 43.6% ↗ | — | — |
| Chess Puzzles (Epoch AI run) | not reported | 0% ↗epoch run | — | — |
| GPQA (thinking) | not reported | 51.6% ↗ | — | — |
| HMMT Feb 25 (thinking) | not reported | 22.9% ↗ | — | — |
| IFBench (thinking) | not reported | 41.3% ↗ | — | — |
| IFEval (non-thinking) | not reported | 61.2% ↗ | — | — |
| IFEval (thinking) | not reported | 78.6% ↗ | — | — |
| LongBench v2 (thinking) | not reported | 38.7% ↗ | — | — |
| MMLU-Pro (non-thinking) | not reported | 55.3% ↗ | — | — |
| MMLU-Pro (thinking) | not reported | 66.5% ↗ | — | — |
| MMLU-Redux (thinking) | not reported | 79.6% ↗ | — | — |
| MMMLU (thinking) | not reported | 63.1% ↗ | — | — |
| MMMU (thinking) | not reported | 64.2% ↗ | — | — |
| MMMU-Pro (thinking) | not reported | 50.3% ↗ | — | — |
| SuperGPQA (thinking) | not reported | 37.5% ↗ | — | — |
| TAU2-Bench (thinking) | not reported | 48.8% ↗ | — | — |
Scores tagged "epoch" or "matharena" are independent runs, used only where the lab has not published its own; ⚠ marks rows MathArena flags as released after the competition. Higher is better on every row. Δ is Claude Opus 5.5 minus Qwen3.5 2B in the benchmark's own unit. "Not reported" means the lab has not published that figure; it is not a zero. ↗ opens the source.
Specs & pricing
Side by side
Official pricing pages and model cards| Spec | Claude Opus 5.5 | Qwen3.5 2B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|
| Context window | 1M tokens | 262K tokens | Claude Opus 5.5 |
| Max output | 128K tokens | — | — |
| Input price / 1M | $4 ↗ | — | — |
| Output price / 1M | $20 ↗ | — | — |
| Cached input / 1M | $0.2 ↗ | — | — |
| Input + output / 1M Lower is cheaper. List prices; batch, tool and regional fees excluded. | $24 | — | — |
| Modalities | text · vision | text · vision · video | Qwen3.5 2B |
| Released | 2026-09-22 | 2026-03-02 | — |
| Cited benchmark scores | 34 | 16 | — |
Reliability
Provider status
Live from /statusMore matchups
Claude Opus 5.5 vs …
Models sharing the most benchmarksMore matchups
Qwen3.5 2B vs …
Models sharing the most benchmarksBuilt by Respan
Which one wins on your data?
Public benchmarks are a starting point. Run Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen3.5 2B on your own prompts with Respan evals, or route to either through one gateway key with automatic failover.