Claude Opus 4.6 vs Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
Side-by-side API pricing and Artificial Analysis performance for Claude Opus 4.6 (Anthropic) and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct (Alibaba (Qwen)). Green cells mark the better value in each row.
Prices updated Jul 22, 2026, 3:52 AM UTC · refreshed hourly
| Claude Opus 4.6 Anthropic | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct Alibaba (Qwen) | |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | ||
| Input $/1M | $5.00 | $0.66 |
| Output $/1M | $25.00 | $1.00 |
| Blended $/1M (3:1) | $10.00 | $0.745 |
| RAG example (30K in / 2K out) | $0.2 | $0.0218 |
| Quality & speed | ||
| Intelligence Index | 37.8 | 7.1 |
| Coding Index | — | — |
| Agentic Index | — | — |
| Output speed (tok/s) | 57 | 0 |
| Time to first token | 1.85s | 0s |
| Specs | ||
| Context window | 1M | 33K |
| Input modalities | text, image, file | text |
FAQ
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.6 or Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct?
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct has the lower blended API price at $0.745 per 1M tokens (3:1 input:output mix), versus $10.00 for the other model. Prices are live from OpenRouter and refresh about hourly.
Which is better for RAG workloads?
For a typical RAG request (30K input / 2K output tokens), Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct costs about $0.0218 per request versus $0.2. Also compare context windows: Claude Opus 4.6 offers 1M and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct offers 33K.
Which scores higher on Artificial Analysis benchmarks?
Claude Opus 4.6 leads on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (37.8 vs 7.1). Check coding and agentic indices on this page for workload-specific tradeoffs.