For Developers/Models/Compare/Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Qwen 3

Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Qwen 3

Pricing, benchmarks, and use case comparison

Quick take

  • Claude Sonnet 4.6 is meaningfully stronger at multimodal (82 vs 30 on our capability index).
  • Qwen 3 is open-weights (free to self-host); Claude Sonnet 4.6 is paid API only.
  • Claude Sonnet 4.6 has a 1M context window vs 128K tokens (32K for 0.6B/1.7B/4B dense variants) - better for whole-repo or long-document work.

Specs comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.6Qwen 3
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen Team)
TypeClosed sourceOpen source
Context window1M128K tokens (32K for 0.6B/1.7B/4B dense variants)
Input / 1M tokens$3.00Free (self-host)
Output / 1M tokens$15.00Free (self-host)
Release date2026-022025-04

Benchmarks

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen 3
SWE-bench Verified79.6%-
Terminal-Bench 2.059.1%-
OSWorld-Verified72.5%-
GPQA79.7%-
Qwen3-235B-A22B-235B total / 22B active
Qwen3-30B-A3B-30B total / 3B active

Scores sourced from official provider release posts and independent benchmark aggregators.

Which should you choose?

Choose Claude Sonnet 4.6 if...

  • You have an existing integration pinned to Sonnet 4.6 and want stability
  • You need a proven mid-tier model with 1M context at $3/$15
  • You want predictable behavior without the new-tokenizer/thinking changes in Sonnet 5
  • You are cost-sensitive and don't need Sonnet 5's incremental gains
Full Claude Sonnet 4.6 details →

Choose Qwen 3 if...

  • You need an open, self-hostable model with a permissive license
  • You want to toggle deep reasoning on or off per request
  • Multilingual applications
  • Efficient inference via MoE with few active parameters
Full Qwen 3 details →

Compare Claude Sonnet 4.6 with others