Skip to content
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Compare
  4. /
  5. Claude Opus 5.5vsQwen3 235B A22B
Updated Sep 2026

Claude Opus 5.5vsQwen3 235B A22B

Claude Opus 5.5 has a larger context window than Qwen3 235B A22B (1.0M tokens vs 33K tokens).

Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen3 235B A22B compared across 19 shared prompts
SpecClaude Opus 5.5Qwen3 235B A22B
Input price$4/M tokens—
Output price$20/M tokens—
Context window1.0M tokens33K tokens
WeightsClosedOpen
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedSep 2026Apr 2025
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 6 of the 19 prompts both answered. Formatting stripped, words untouched.

Mini LBO Underwrite

You are underwriting a 5-year LBO for a private equity investment committee. Company (fictional): HarborTech Services (HTS) –…

Claude Opus 5.5900 words
HarborTech Services: 5-Year LBO Underwriting Conventions: $m. Interest is charged on beginning-of-year balances, which avoids circularity. Term Loan (TL) amortization is 1% of the original $480m, or $4.8m per year. Mezz PIK accrues to principal. All FCF after mandatory debt service sweeps to the TL.
Read the full answer
Qwen3 235B A22B356 words
Simplified Year-by-Year Table (FY2026–FY2030) Year Revenue ($M) EBITDA ($M) TL Interest ($M) Mezz Interest ($M) Cash Taxes ($M) Capex ($M) ΔNWC ($M) FCF ($M) TL Balance ($M) Mezz Balance ($M) FY2026 972.0 136.1 43.2 21.6 17.8 29.2 0.4 23.9 456.1 183.6 FY2027 1,040.0 156.0 41.0 22.0 23.2 31.2 0.3 38.2 417.9 187.3 FY2028…
Read the full answer

Michelin Star Recipe Design

Design an innovative recipe for a multi-component dish worthy of a Michelin 3-star restaurant. The recipe should feature an unusual…

Claude Opus 5.52,253 words
"Hive & Tide" Langoustine, Beeswax, White Chocolate & Oscietra Caviar, Hay-Baked Celeriac, Fermented Green Strawberry, Sea Buckthorn I. The Concept Most coastal menus celebrate the meeting of sea and land. This dish is about a stranger, quieter meeting: the meadow and the seabed, the bee and the langoustine.
Read the full answer
Qwen3 235B A22B669 words
Recipe Name: Lunaria: A Moonlit Garden of the Sea and Soil Conceptual Narrative: Inspired by the ethereal contrast between moonlit tides and nocturnal gardens, this dish marries the briny sweetness of the ocean with the delicate florals of chamomile and the umami depth of fermented earth.
Read the full answer

Simple 7-Ingredient Recipe

Create a simple recipe for a delicious dish (sweet or savory) using only 7 common pantry ingredients. Include a creative name for the dish…

Claude Opus 5.5300 words
Midnight Silk Noodles Creamy, tangy peanut noodles with a gentle kick, ready faster than takeout. Serves: 2 Prep time: 5 minutes Cook time: 10 minutes Total time: 15 minutes The 7 Ingredients 8 oz (225 g) spaghetti (or any long noodle) ¼ cup creamy peanut butter 3 tablespoons soy sauce 1 tablespoon honey (or sugar) 1…
Read the full answer
Qwen3 235B A22B180 words
Recipe Name: "Caramel-Drizzle Buttergold Muffins" Estimated Prep Time: 10 minutes Cook Time: 20 minutes Total Time: 30 minutes Ingredients (7 total): All-purpose flour Granulated sugar Unsalted butter (softened) Large egg Baking powder Milk Vanilla extract Instructions: Preheat oven to 375°F (190°C).
Read the full answer

Debug This Architecture

Here's the architecture for a real-time collaborative document editor (like Google Docs): **System Overview:** - Frontend: React SPA with…

Claude Opus 5.52,280 words
Architecture Review: Real-Time Collaborative Editor The most serious problems cluster in three areas: the sync model (client-clock LWW), cross-server propagation (per-server WebSockets with DB polling), and the CDN/auth layer, which can leak data between users. Issues are grouped by area below.
Read the full answer
Qwen3 235B A22B749 words
Potential Failure Modes, Race Conditions, and Scaling Bottlenecks 1. WebSocket State Isolation Across Servers Failure Mode: Users connected to different API servers do not receive real-time updates from other servers until the 2-second poll interval.
Read the full answer

Adversarial Contract Review

Here is a contract for a software consulting engagement: --- SOFTWARE CONSULTING AGREEMENT This Agreement is entered into between TechCorp…

Claude Opus 5.54,420 words
Contractor-Side Review of the Software Consulting Agreement Overall assessment: This agreement is heavily one-sided. Nearly every clause shifts risk, cost, or control to the Contractor, and several provisions interact to create compounding exposure.
Read the full answer
Qwen3 235B A22B727 words
Here is a structured analysis of problematic clauses in the agreement, along with suggested modifications and legal reasoning: 1. SCOPE CLAUSE (Clause 1) Issue: Client can unilaterally modify scope without additional compensation, creating financial risk and potential exploitation via "scope creep."
Read the full answer

Explain Like I'm a Specific Expert

Explain how a large language model (like GPT or Claude) learns and generates text to each of these three audiences: 1. **An experienced…

Claude Opus 5.51,442 words
How Large Language Models Work: Three Explanations For the Experienced Software Engineer Think of an LLM as a single, very large pure function: f(tokens[0..n]) → probability distribution over tokens[n+1]. Text is chunked into tokens (roughly word fragments, from a vocabulary of about 100k).
Read the full answer
Qwen3 235B A22B726 words
To the Software Engineer (Skeptical ML Novice): Think of a large language model (LLM) as a distributed system for semantic routing. At its core, the model is a massive lookup table trained to map input sequences (tokens) to output sequences, but the magic lies in its architecture.
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
Claude Opus 5.5
Claude Opus 5.5
Qwen3 235B A22B
Qwen3 235B A22B

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, nothing separates them.

Too close to call

Reviewing agent-written code?See a Brief PR report

API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

Claude Opus 5.5
Input
$4.00
Output
$20.00
Qwen3 235B A22B
Input
—
Output
—
Where to run it

5 hosts

Claude Opus 5.54 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
Amazon Bedrock$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·99.8% upAzure AI Foundry$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·100% upAnthropic$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·100% upGoogle Vertex AI$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·100% up
Qwen3 235B A22B1 host
HostInOutContextUptime
Alibaba Cloud$0.46 in·$1.82 out·131k·99.3% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 25 Sep 2026.

Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

Claude Opus 5.5 is developed by Anthropic while Qwen3 235B A22B is developed by Qwen. Claude Opus 5.5 has a 1.0M token context window vs Qwen3 235B A22B's 33K. You can compare their actual outputs across 19 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen3 235B A22B each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 19 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of Claude Opus 5.5 and Qwen3 235B A22B across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.

Keep exploring

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

Claude Opus 5.5 logoSolar Mini 4 logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Solar Mini 4Landed Sep 2026
Qwen3 235B A22B logoQwen3.8 Max Prime logo
Qwen3 235B A22B vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeLanded Sep 2026
Claude Opus 5.5 logoGLM 5.3 Prime logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs GLM 5.3 PrimeLanded Sep 2026
Qwen3 235B A22B logoQwen3.8 Omni Flash logo
Qwen3 235B A22B vs Qwen3.8 Omni FlashLanded Sep 2026
Claude Opus 5.5 logoCommand A+ logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Command A+Landed Sep 2026
Qwen3 235B A22B logoGPT-6 Luna Pro logo
Qwen3 235B A22B vs GPT-6 Luna ProLanded Sep 2026
Claude Opus 5.5 logoGPT-6 Sol Pro logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-6 Sol ProLanded Sep 2026
Qwen3 235B A22B logoGPT-6 Luna logo
Qwen3 235B A22B vs GPT-6 LunaLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

Claude Opus 5.5 logoClaude Opus 4.6 logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6Same lab
Claude Opus 5.5 logoClaude Fable 5.1 logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Fable 5.1Same lab
Qwen3 235B A22B logoQwen3.7 Flash logo
Qwen3 235B A22B vs Qwen3.7 FlashSame lab
Qwen3 235B A22B logoQwen3.8 Flash logo
Qwen3 235B A22B vs Qwen3.8 FlashSame lab
Qwen3 235B A22B logoGPT-4.1 Mini logo
Qwen3 235B A22B vs GPT-4.1 MiniNew provider
Claude Opus 5.5 logoGPT-4.1 Nano logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-4.1 NanoNew provider
Qwen3 235B A22B logoGPT-4.5 logo
Qwen3 235B A22B vs GPT-4.5Same size
Qwen3 235B A22B logoGPT-4o (Omni) logo
Qwen3 235B A22B vs GPT-4o (Omni)Same size

Model pages

Claude Opus 5.5 logo
Claude Opus 5.519 outputs, specs and price
Qwen3 235B A22B logo
Qwen3 235B A22B58 outputs, specs and price
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed