Model comparison
Claude Sonnet 5 vs Qwen3 235B 2507
Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Sonnet 5 #29 (Estimated); Qwen3 235B 2507 #78 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Sonnet 5 and Qwen3 235B 2507 share 0 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 36 results are unique to Claude Sonnet 5; 4 to Qwen3 235B 2507.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- Claude Sonnet 5 only
- 36
- Qwen3 235B 2507 only
- 4
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Claude Sonnet 5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3 235B 2507 only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Claude Sonnet 5 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 65.32 to 56.02. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Claude Sonnet 5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.00 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Qwen3 235B 2507. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Claude Sonnet 5 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Qwen3 235B 2507 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Claude Sonnet 5 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for Qwen3 235B 2507.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 5 | Qwen3 235B 2507 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Sonnet 5$2 input / $10 output | Qwen3 235B 2507$0 input / $0 output | Qwen3 235B 2507 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Sonnet 5Not available | Qwen3 235B 2507Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Sonnet 5Not available | Qwen3 235B 2507Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Sonnet 51M | Qwen3 235B 2507128K | Claude Sonnet 5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Qwen3 235B 2507 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 80.4% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 84.7% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | 57.4% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 81.2% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1607 | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 46.7% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 55.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 1388 | — | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | 39.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | 44.7% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | 90.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 28.2% | — | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | 80.5% | — | Not comparable |
Coding9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Qwen3 235B 2507 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 85.2% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 63.2% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 78.3% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE MultimodalSource | 28.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 80.4% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource | 42.7% | — | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | 61.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 71.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 53.6% | — | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
KnowledgeQwen3 235B 2507 wins11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Qwen3 235B 2507 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| HLESource | 57.4% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 43.2% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 53.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 91.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 39.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 15.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 38.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 37.3% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | — | 77.5% | Not comparable |
| SuperGPQASource | — | 62.6% | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 83% | Not comparable |
Multilingual1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Qwen3 235B 2507 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProXSource | — | 79.4% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Claude Sonnet 5 or Qwen3 235B 2507?
Claude Sonnet 5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 65.32 to 56.02.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Sonnet 5 or Qwen3 235B 2507?
Qwen3 235B 2507 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 78.9 versus 57.4. Claude Sonnet 5 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Related Comparisons
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.