Model Comparison
Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning)
vs. Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Default Fallback)
Comparing 2 AI models · 0 benchmarks · Alibaba, Anthropic
Recommended Pick
AlQwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning)4 metric winsStrongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning)
100.0 value score
20.2 reasoning / $1.13/1M
Lowest Price
Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning)
$0.50/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Default Fallback)
57.6 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning)
44.6 coding index
Differences That Matter
Best value
Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning) is 8.0x cheaper on input tokens than Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Default Fallback).
Reasoning gap
Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Default Fallback) leads Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning) by 37.4 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning) wins 4 measurable categories, including Value, Input price, Output price, Blended price.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Default Fallback)
Anthropic
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Secure AI Chat made in Europe
Use Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini alongside with EU-Hosted Models like Deepseek, Qwen & Kimi.
EU-hosted inference
Servers in Germany & Finland. Designed to meet strict GDPR and ISO 27001 compliance requirements.
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick Al Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning) | An Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Default Fallback) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.50/1M | $4.00/1M |
| Output Cost | $3.00/1M | $20.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.13/1M | $8.00/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Alibaba | Anthropic |
| Release Date | Aug 14, 2026 | Sep 22, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 49.1 tok/s | — |
| TTFT | 3880ms | — |
| Latency | 3880ms | — |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 40.1 |
| Reasoning Score | 20.2 | 57.6 |
| Intelligence | 20.2 | 57.6 |
| Coding | 44.6 | — |
Key Takeaways
Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning) offers the best value at $0.50/1M,making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Default Fallback) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 57.6 reasoning score,combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning) reaches a 44.6 coding index,making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens,suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Qwen3.8 27B (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Code generation
- Software development
Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Default Fallback)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
