Claude Opus 4 vs Qwen3.5 122B A10B
Compare Claude Opus 4 and Qwen3.5 122B A10B side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, and Open Prompt.
Compare Claude Opus 4 vs Qwen3.5 122B A10B 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.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Claude Opus 4 is deprecated and can no longer be run. Details and evals are still available on its model page.
Models in this comparison
Claude Opus 4 vs Qwen3.5 122B A10B: Overview
Claude 4 Opus, released by Anthropic in May 2025, is the flagship model of the Claude 4 family, built for complex, long-horizon reasoning and advanced coding workflows. It is multimodal, supporting text (including voice), images, and tool use, and operates as a hybrid reasoning model—able to deliver quick answers in fast mode or switch to extended thinking for deeper, multi-step problem solving. With a ~200,000-token context window and a training cutoff around March 2025, it is optimized for handling large documents, long conversations, and sophisticated agentic tasks.
Positioned at the high end of Anthropic’s offerings, Opus 4 achieves state-of-the-art results on coding benchmarks like SWE-Bench (72.5%) and Terminal-Bench (43.2%). It is best suited for research, enterprise automation, and software development at scale. The model is classified at Anthropic’s ASL-3 safety level, denoting advanced oversight and safety features.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B is a high-capacity multimodal Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) model developed by Alibaba’s Qwen team as part of the Qwen3.5 model family. The architecture contains 122 billion total parameters while activating roughly 10 billion per token through sparse expert routing, allowing the model to balance large-scale reasoning ability with relatively efficient inference compared to dense models of similar size.
The model is designed to process both text and visual inputs within a unified multimodal framework, enabling tasks that require reasoning across images, documents, charts, and natural language. This makes it suitable for applications such as document understanding, diagram interpretation, and complex visual question answering.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B supports a native context window of approximately 256,000 tokens, which can be extended further through techniques such as YaRN scaling to support very long-context workloads. Released under the Apache 2.0 license, it builds on earlier Qwen multimodal systems and provides developers with an open-weight model capable of handling demanding multimodal reasoning and analysis tasks.
Claude Opus 4 vs Qwen3.5 122B A10B Comparison Table
| Property | Claude Opus 4 | Qwen3.5 122B A10B |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Anthropic | Qwen |
| Category | closed | open |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | May 2025 | Feb 2026 |
| Context Window | 200K | 256K |
| Parameters | 122B | |
| License | Proprietary | Apache 2.0 |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $15.00 | $0.260 |
| Output $/1M | $75.00 | $2.08 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | |
| Object Detection | ||
| OCR | Demo | |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | |
| Classification | ||
| 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 | 56.72% | 76.12% |
| Avg Response Time | 19.74s | 1.77s |
| Median input tokensincl. image tokens | 1.2K | |
| Median output tokens | 7 | |
| Est. cost / taskon this benchmark | $0.0003 | |
| Defect Detection | 66.7%(10/15) | 86.7%(13/15) |
| Document Understanding | 88.9%(8/9) | 77.8%(7/9) |
| Object Counting | 0%(0/10) | 40%(4/10) |
| Object Understanding | 64.3%(9/14) | 92.9%(13/14) |
| Spatial Understanding | 57.9%(11/19) | 73.7%(14/19) |
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