Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Qwen3.5 27B

Compare Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Qwen3.5 27B 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 27B 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 27B
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Qwen3.5 27B: 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 27B

Qwen3.5-27B is a multimodal dense hybrid model developed by Alibaba Cloud’s Qwen team and released in February 2026 as a high-precision entry in the Qwen3.5 "Medium" series. Unlike its Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) siblings, the 27B model utilizes a dense architecture combining Gated Delta Networks with a feed-forward structure, activating its full parameter suite for every inference to maximize reliability. This design provides the highest instruction-following and coding accuracy in its class, with a notable IFEval score of 95.0. The model features a native 262K-token context window, extensible to 1M tokens via YaRN (RoPE scaling), and is released under the Apache-2.0 license.

Optimized for agentic workflows, Qwen3.5-27B employs an early-fusion architecture that treats visual and textual data as a unified stream for deep cross-modal reasoning. This unified approach allows the model to excel in technical analysis and software engineering, matching GPT-5-mini with a 72.4% score on SWE-bench Verified. While the larger MoE variants in the family lead in raw knowledge benchmarks, the 27B model offers a stable and high-density alternative for structured data extraction and spatial perception, contributing to the Qwen3.5 family’s generational leap in OCR accuracy over the previous Qwen3-VL series.

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Qwen3.5 27B Comparison Table

PropertyClaude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3.5 27B
OrganizationAnthropicQwen
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateSep 2025Feb 2026
Context Window200K262K
Parameters27B
LicenseProprietaryApache 2.0
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$3.00$0.195
Output $/1M$15.00$1.56
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%
Overall Score
71.64%
Avg Response Time1.98s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens1.2K
Median output tokens7
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0002
Defect Detection
80%(12/15)
Document Understanding
77.8%(7/9)
Object Counting
40%(4/10)
Object Understanding
78.6%(11/14)
Spatial Understanding
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