Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 16, 2026

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Qwen3.8 27B benchmark

Name: Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Qwen3.8 27B AI benchmark comparison
Creator: CompareLLM
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This page compares Claude Sonnet 4.5 (Anthropic) and Qwen3.8 27B (Alibaba) using the latest snapshots we have as of Aug 16, 2026. On preference Elo, Claude Sonnet 4.5 is ahead by 126 points (1,524 vs 1,398; seed-bootstrap (Aug 1, 2026)). On SWE-bench coding, Claude Sonnet 4.5 resolves 70.1% versus 58.8% (seed-bootstrap (Aug 1, 2026)). Qwen3.8 27B streams faster (152 tok/s) while Qwen3.8 27B is the cheaper output token ($3.2/1M). Claude Sonnet 4.5 has the larger context window (1M tokens). Every cell below is a dated snapshot from a named public source — we do not invent missing scores, and we do not run SWE-bench ourselves.

Share Analysis:

WhatsApp Telegram X / Post LinkedIn Reddit

Anthropic

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Workhorse Anthropic model: most of Opus coding quality at a mid-tier price.

Elo 1,524$15/1M out

Alibaba

Qwen3.8 27B

Alibaba open-weight 27B drop dated Aug 14 2026. Dense enough to self-host; not a frontier MoE.

Elo 1,398$3.1999999999999997/1M out

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Instant pairwise benchmark recalculation across 400+ LLMs

Model A

Model B

Quick vs:vs Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs GPT-5

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Claude Sonnet 4.5 (6)vsQwen3.8 27B (4)

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 6W (60%)Overall: Claude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3.8 27B: 4W (40%)

← Claude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3.8 27B →

Claude Sonnet 4.5 (5/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,524vs1,398

Coding Elo

1,531vs1,422

SWE-bench

70.1%vs58.8%

LiveBench

67.4%vs60.6%

GPQA Diamond

80.2%vs73.4%

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 5WQwen3.8 27B: 0W

Qwen3.8 27B (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

88 tok/svs152 tok/s

Time to first token

240 msvs140 ms

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 0WQwen3.8 27B: 2W

Qwen3.8 27B (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$15/1Mvs$3.2/1M

Input price

$3/1Mvs$0.45/1M

Context window

1Mvs262k

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 1WQwen3.8 27B: 2W

Capability Matchup Radar

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Each spoke is a skill. Farther from the center is better (0–100th percentile). Tap any dot to inspect details.

Tap any node to inspect

Percentile 0–100

Dimensional AdvantageClaude Sonnet 4.5 4/6

Preference Elo

Claude Sonnet 4.5

126 pts advantage

Throughput Speed

Qwen3.8 27B

64 tok/s faster

Price Efficiency

Qwen3.8 27B

$11.80/1M cheaper

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

—

Elo

High is better

+9%1,524

EloHigh is better

1,398

Code Elo

High is better

+8%1,531

Code EloHigh is better

1,422

LiveBench

High is better

+11%67.4%

LiveBenchHigh is better

60.6%

SWE-bench

High is better

+19%70.1%

SWE-benchHigh is better

58.8%

GPQA

High is better

+9%80.2%

GPQAHigh is better

73.4%

TTFT

Low is better

240 ms

TTFTLow is better

140 ms+71%

Speed

High is better

88 tok/s

SpeedHigh is better

152 tok/s+73%

In $

Low is better

$3/1M

In $Low is better

$0.45/1M+567%

Out $

Low is better

$15/1M

Out $Low is better

$3.2/1M+369%

Context

High is better

+281%1M

ContextHigh is better

262k

Interactive Simulator

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Simulate monthly production API costs based on published $/1M tokens.

Save up to 81% with Qwen3.8 27B

Monthly Volume50M tokens/mo

Quick Presets:

Token Ratio (In vs Out)70% In / 30% Out

RAG / Search (10% out)Coding / Chat (50% out)

Claude Sonnet 4.5$330.00 / mo

In: $105.00Out: $225.00

Qwen3.8 27B$63.75 / mo

In: $15.75Out: $48.00

Estimated Cost Delta

Qwen3.8 27B is estimated to save $266.25/month ($3,195/year).

Based on 50M tokens (30% gen)

Key Selection Recommendations

1
Claude Sonnet 4.5:Pick Claude Sonnet 4.5 when repo-level coding accuracy is the constraint.
2
Qwen3.8 27B:Pick Qwen3.8 27B when you are optimizing output cost.
3
Qwen3.8 27B:Pick Qwen3.8 27B when time-to-first-token matters more than peak Elo.

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsClaude Sonnet 4.5

Higher SWE-bench (70.1%).

High-volume chatQwen3.8 27B

Lower output list price ($3.2/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIQwen3.8 27B

Lower TTFT (140 ms).

Long-document RAGClaude Sonnet 4.5

Larger window (1M).

Screenshots / visionClaude Sonnet 4.5

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	Claude Sonnet 4.5	Higher SWE-bench (70.1%).
High-volume chat	Qwen3.8 27B	Lower output list price ($3.2/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	Qwen3.8 27B	Lower TTFT (140 ms).
Long-document RAG	Claude Sonnet 4.5	Larger window (1M).
Screenshots / vision	Claude Sonnet 4.5	Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

View all news

launchAug 14, 2026

Qwen3.8 27B (Aug 14): dense enough to self-host, not a frontier MoE

Alibaba open-weight 27B drop. Local/open-weight lists should see it. It will not win frontier-agents.

launchFeb 18, 2026

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the previous workhorse — still a valid vs baseline

Most of Opus 4.5 coding at a mid-tier price. Sonnet 5 replaced it as the buy; 4.5 remains a compare baseline.

Community Sentiment

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!

Share card

The real PNG is generated at /compare/claude-sonnet-4-5-vs-qwen-3-8-27b/opengraph-image for crawlers.

PNG

CompareLLM Matrix

Verified head-to-head card

LIVE

Anthropic

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Elo 1,524

LiveBench67.4%

SWE-bench70.1%

Speed88 tok/s

Output cost$15/1M

Alibaba

Qwen3.8 27B

Elo 1,398

LiveBench60.6%

SWE-bench58.8%

Speed152 tok/s

Output cost$3.2/1M

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Qwen3.8 27B?: Claude Sonnet 4.5 has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,524). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.
Which is better at coding, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Qwen3.8 27B?: Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads SWE-bench at 70.1% vs 58.8%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.
Which is cheaper to run in production?: Qwen3.8 27B output tokens are $3.2/1M versus $15/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.
Which is faster, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Qwen3.8 27B?: Qwen3.8 27B has the lower time-to-first-token (140 ms vs 240 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.
Which has the larger context window?: Claude Sonnet 4.5 accepts 1M tokens versus 262k.
Can I self-host either model?: Qwen3.8 27B is marked open-weights in our catalog. The other side is a closed API. Check the provider license before you ship weights.
Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?: No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.
What does preference Elo mean on this page?: Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Qwen3.8 27B Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All Claude Sonnet 4.5 matchups →|All Qwen3.8 27B matchups →

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Claude Sonnet 4 (previous sonnet)Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Claude Sonnet 5 (next sonnet)Qwen3.8 27B vs Qwen 3 Max (previous qwen)Qwen 3 Max vs Claude Sonnet 4.5 Qwen QwQ 32B vs Claude Sonnet 4.5 Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Sonnet 4.5

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Qwen3.8 27B benchmark

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Claude Sonnet 4.5 (6)vsQwen3.8 27B (4)

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 6W (60%)Overall: Claude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3.8 27B: 4W (40%)

← Claude Sonnet 4.5Qwen3.8 27B →

Claude Sonnet 4.5 (5/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,524vs1,398

Coding Elo

1,531vs1,422

SWE-bench

70.1%vs58.8%

LiveBench

67.4%vs60.6%

GPQA Diamond

80.2%vs73.4%

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 5WQwen3.8 27B: 0W

Qwen3.8 27B (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

88 tok/svs152 tok/s

Time to first token

240 msvs140 ms

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 0WQwen3.8 27B: 2W

Qwen3.8 27B (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$15/1Mvs$3.2/1M

Input price

$3/1Mvs$0.45/1M

Context window

1Mvs262k

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 1WQwen3.8 27B: 2W

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsClaude Sonnet 4.5

Higher SWE-bench (70.1%).

High-volume chatQwen3.8 27B

Lower output list price ($3.2/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIQwen3.8 27B

Lower TTFT (140 ms).

Long-document RAGClaude Sonnet 4.5

Larger window (1M).

Screenshots / visionClaude Sonnet 4.5

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	Claude Sonnet 4.5	Higher SWE-bench (70.1%).
High-volume chat	Qwen3.8 27B	Lower output list price ($3.2/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	Qwen3.8 27B	Lower TTFT (140 ms).
Long-document RAG	Claude Sonnet 4.5	Larger window (1M).
Screenshots / vision	Claude Sonnet 4.5	Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Qwen3.8 27B?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,524). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.

Which is better at coding, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Qwen3.8 27B?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads SWE-bench at 70.1% vs 58.8%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.

Which is cheaper to run in production?

Qwen3.8 27B output tokens are $3.2/1M versus $15/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.

Which is faster, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Qwen3.8 27B?

Qwen3.8 27B has the lower time-to-first-token (140 ms vs 240 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.

Which has the larger context window?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 accepts 1M tokens versus 262k.

Can I self-host either model?

Qwen3.8 27B is marked open-weights in our catalog. The other side is a closed API. Check the provider license before you ship weights.

Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?

No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.

What does preference Elo mean on this page?

Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Qwen3.8 27B Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Intelligence & Reasoning

Speed & Latency

Pricing & Capacity

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Qwen3.8 27B

Qwen3.8 27B

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Key Selection Recommendations

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

Qwen3.8 27B (Aug 14): dense enough to self-host, not a frontier MoE

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the previous workhorse — still a valid vs baseline

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Qwen3.8 27B

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Intelligence & Reasoning

Speed & Latency

Pricing & Capacity

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Qwen3.8 27B

Qwen3.8 27B

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Key Selection Recommendations

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

Qwen3.8 27B (Aug 14): dense enough to self-host, not a frontier MoE

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the previous workhorse — still a valid vs baseline

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Qwen3.8 27B

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons