Skip to main content

Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 5 vs Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 12 shared benchmark results across 4 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

65.32/100
Margin
5.6pts
← winning
59.72/100
2 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Sonnet 5 #29 (Estimated); Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) #53 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Sonnet 5 and Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) share 12 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 24 results are unique to Claude Sonnet 5; 9 to Qwen 3.6 Max (preview).

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
12
Claude Sonnet 5 only
24
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) only
9
Comparable categories
3 / 8

Pick Claude Sonnet 5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 12 shared benchmark results across 4 evidence categories; 3 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 59.72. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Claude Sonnet 5's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 76.7 against 51. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 80.4% to 65.4%. Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

Claude Sonnet 5 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Qwen 3.6 Max (preview).

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Claude Sonnet 5 and Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)
CategoryClaude Sonnet 5ΔQwen 3.6 Max (preview)
CodingClaude Sonnet 576.7Margin 25.7Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)51.0
KnowledgeClaude Sonnet 557.4Margin 16.5Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)73.9
AgenticClaude Sonnet 581.9Margin 16.5Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)65.4
MathClaude Sonnet 5Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen 3.6 Max (preview)18.4
MultimodalClaude Sonnet 588.3MarginNo overlapQwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Claude Sonnet 5B · Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)
  1. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 80.4%B 65.4%
    Winner: Claude Sonnet 5Δ 15
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Claude Sonnet 5 scored 80.4%; Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) scored 65.4%. Claude Sonnet 5 wins this benchmark.
  2. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 63.2%B 57.3%
    Winner: Claude Sonnet 5Δ 5.9
    SWE-bench Pro: Claude Sonnet 5 scored 63.2%; Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) scored 57.3%. Claude Sonnet 5 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude Sonnet 5Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Sonnet 5$2 input / $10 outputQwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Sonnet 5Not availableQwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Sonnet 5Not availableQwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Sonnet 51MQwen 3.6 Max (preview)256KClaude Sonnet 5 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticClaude Sonnet 5 wins
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 80.4%65.4%Claude Sonnet 5 leads
BrowseCompSource 84.7%Not comparable
HLE w/ toolsSource 57.4%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 81.2%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1607Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 46.7%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 55.4%Not comparable
AA BriefcaseSource 1388Not 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
QwenClawBenchSource 59.0%Not comparable
QwenWebBenchSource 1532Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 95.9%Not comparable
CodingClaude Sonnet 5 wins
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Result
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 85.2%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 63.2%57.3%Claude Sonnet 5 leads
SWE MultilingualSource 78.3%Not comparable
SWE MultimodalSource 28.1%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 80.4%65.4%Claude Sonnet 5 leads
FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource 42.7%Not comparable
cursorBench32Source 61.5%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 71.5%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 53.6%46.9%Claude Sonnet 5 leads
SciCodeSource 47%Not comparable
NL2RepoSource 42.9%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Result
AA-LCRSource 70.7%69.7%Claude Sonnet 5 leads
CritPtSource 16.9%3.7%Claude Sonnet 5 leads
KnowledgeQwen 3.6 Max (preview) wins
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Result
HLESource 57.4%Not comparable
HLE w/o toolsSource 43.2%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 53.4%40.0%Claude Sonnet 5 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 91.1%88.8%Claude Sonnet 5 leads
AA-HLESource 39.6%28.9%Claude Sonnet 5 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 15.3%10.2%Claude Sonnet 5 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 38.3%37.7%Claude Sonnet 5 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 37.3%44.2%Claude Sonnet 5 leads
SuperGPQASource 73.9%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Result
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 23.103%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 4.167%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Result
CharXivSource 88.3%Not comparable
CharXiv w/o toolsSource 77%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 77.3%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1314Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 5Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Result
AA-IFBenchSource 76.6%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (4)

Which is better, Claude Sonnet 5 or Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)?

Claude Sonnet 5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 65.32 to 59.72. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 80.4% and 65.4%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Sonnet 5 or Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)?

Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 73.9 versus 57.4. Inside this category, Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, Claude Sonnet 5 or Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)?

Claude Sonnet 5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 76.7 versus 51. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Sonnet 5 or Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)?

Claude Sonnet 5 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.9 versus 65.4. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 23, 2026

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.