Roboflow

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Qwen3.5 9b

Compare Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Qwen3.5 9b side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, and Open Prompt.

Compare Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Qwen3.5 9b live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

Extract and compare text from images across multiple models.

Open OCR in the full playground
AnthropicClaude Sonnet 4.5
Run to compare this model.
QwenQwen3.5 9b
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Qwen3.5 9b: Overview

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Claude Sonnet 4.5, released by Anthropic in September 2025, is the company’s most advanced Sonnet-series model, built for high-performance reasoning, coding, and long-horizon agentic workflows. It is a multimodal system that accepts both text and images, with a 200,000-token context window designed for handling large documents and extended interactions. Anthropic highlights its improvements in reliability, reduced sycophancy, and alignment, making it suitable for sustained enterprise use.

The model delivers strong results in coding and autonomous workflows, achieving 61.4% on the OSWorld benchmark and leading performance on SWE-bench Verified. It introduces infrastructure features such as a memory tool (beta), checkpointing for Claude Code, parallel tool use, and tighter integration with VS Code. Compared to Opus, which targets broader reasoning, Sonnet 4.5 is optimized for structured, long-duration tasks. Positioned against leading offerings from OpenAI and Google, it is aimed at enterprise automation, software engineering, and research-intensive applications.

Qwen3.5 9b

Qwen3.5-9B is a 9-billion-parameter multimodal foundation model developed by Alibaba Cloud's Qwen team, released on March 2, 2026 as part of the Qwen3.5 model family. Designed for efficient multimodal reasoning and long-context language tasks, it notably outperforms the older Qwen3-30B, a model more than three times its size, on key benchmarks including GPQA Diamond, IFEval, and LongBench.

The model supports vision-language inputs through an early-fusion multimodal architecture built on a dense hybrid foundation of Gated Delta Networks and Gated Attention. It can also operate in a text-only mode by skipping the vision encoder during inference. It provides a 262,144-token context window (extensible to ~1M tokens via YaRN) and is released under the Apache License 2.0. Within the current AI landscape, Qwen3.5-9B offers a strong balance of capability and efficiency, making it well-suited for multimodal assistants, document analysis, long-context reasoning, and developer-deployed agentic systems.

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Qwen3.5 9b Comparison Table

PropertyClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3.5 9b
OrganizationAnthropicQwen
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateSep 2025Mar 2026
Context Window200K262K
Parameters9B
LicenseProprietaryApache 2.0
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$3.00$0.100
Output $/1M$15.00$0.150
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Object DetectionDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
ClassificationDemo
Model Features
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Foundation Vision
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts
Score key:≥75%40–74%<40%
Visual Understanding
Overall Score
59.7%
71.64%
Avg Response Time5.67s8.99s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens2.2K
Median output tokens182
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0092
Defect Detection
73.3%(11/15)
86.7%(13/15)
Document Understanding
77.8%(7/9)
66.7%(6/9)
Object Counting
10%(1/10)
30%(3/10)
Object Understanding
64.3%(9/14)
71.4%(10/14)
Spatial Understanding
63.2%(12/19)
84.2%(16/19)
OCR
Overall Score
67.25%
Avg Response Time3.93s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens735
Median output tokens115
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0039
Focused Scene OCR
71.7%(71/99)
Handwritten Math
20%(2/10)
License Plate Recognition
53.3%(16/30)
Text Recognition
66.7%(20/30)
VQA & Extraction
75%(45/60)

Output tokens (incl. reasoning) and est. cost / task are measured on this benchmark from a single low-temperature run, and shown only for models whose run covered at least 90% of prompts. Methodology