Compare / Qwen3.5-Plus (2026-02-15) vs Claude Opus 4.7
Qwen3.5-Plus (2026-02-15) vs Claude Opus 4.7
Which is cheaper, which is more capable, and which does better at each kind of work, from 4 results on 3 sources that measured both models.
Of the 4 results both models have, the better value on each. Results whose reported ranges overlap are too close to call.
Results as of 13 October 2026 (catalogue release 2026-10-13-2e2420e3c5cc). See also Alibaba vs Anthropic, every model from both labs.
Qwen3.5-Plus (2026-02-15) or Claude Opus 4.7? The short answer
They score about the same, so pick Qwen3.5-Plus (2026-02-15): it costs 17 times less per token.
- Qwen3.5-Plus (2026-02-15) is cheaper: $0.58 against $10.00 per million tokens, 17 times less.
- Claude Opus 4.7 is newer: released 16 Apr 2026, against 16 Feb 2026 for Qwen3.5-Plus (2026-02-15).
- On third-party benchmarks, on the results both models have: Claude Opus 4.7 does better for agents and tool use.
Head to head
Every fact side by side
| Qwen3.5-Plus (2026-02-15) | Claude Opus 4.7 | |
|---|---|---|
| Price per million tokens | $0.26 in · $1.56 out | $5.00 in · $25.00 out |
| Blended (3 in : 1 out) | $0.58 | $10.00 |
| Cheapest host, blended | – | $10.00 (Amazon Bedrock) |
| Intelligence Index | – | 40.7 |
| Spring Prompt overall | – | – |
| Output speed, tokens a second | – | – |
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens |
| Released | 16 Feb 2026 | 16 Apr 2026 (newer) |
| Weights | Closed | Closed |
| Developer based in | China | the US |
Prices are the developer's list price where we have read it, otherwise the typical host on OpenRouter; see every model's price. Intelligence and speed from Artificial Analysis.
Which is better for what
Each model's rank among the models on sale today, for each kind of work, from our own benchmarks and licensed sources. Further right is better; the better rank is in green.
Every shared result
Each model's best result on every measure both have, grouped by benchmark, with the setting that produced it. Under each measure, every model that benchmark has measured is a grey tick, best to the right, so you can see where the two sit in the field. The headline measures of each benchmark come first; the rest are under "Show all". Green marks the better value; where a source reports ranges that overlap, neither is marked.
| Measure | Qwen3.5-Plus (2026-02-15) | Claude Opus 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI) reported by SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI) · 1 result | ||
| Correct answers% of questions, higher is better 62 · 22 of 76 measured | 25.4% | 51.7%xhigh reasoning |
| Vectara Hallucination Leaderboard reported by Vectara Hallucination Leaderboard · 2 results | ||
| Hallucination rate · Vectara% of summaries, lower is better 67 · 77 of 104 measured | 10.7% | 12.0% |
| Answer rate · Vectara% of documents, higher is better 31 · 78 of 104 measured | 99.8% | 98.0% |
| Vending-Bench 2 reported by Vending-Bench 2 · 1 result | ||
| Money after a yearUS dollars, higher is better 54 · 4 of 58 measured | $0.54 | $10,937 |
Compare them with other models
Quick answers
Is Qwen3.5-Plus (2026-02-15) better than Claude Opus 4.7?
They score about the same, so pick Qwen3.5-Plus (2026-02-15): it costs 17 times less per token.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.5-Plus (2026-02-15) or Claude Opus 4.7?
Qwen3.5-Plus (2026-02-15) is cheaper: $0.58 against $10.00 per million tokens, 17 times less.
Which is better for agents and tool use, Qwen3.5-Plus (2026-02-15) or Claude Opus 4.7?
Claude Opus 4.7 ranks 25 of 164 models on sale for multi-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls, against 160 for Qwen3.5-Plus (2026-02-15).
Which is better for sticking to the facts, Qwen3.5-Plus (2026-02-15) or Claude Opus 4.7?
Claude Opus 4.7 ranks 52 of 152 models on sale for summarising without inventing things, and factual answers, against 115 for Qwen3.5-Plus (2026-02-15).
Run Qwen3.5-Plus (2026-02-15) and Claude Opus 4.7 on your own prompt
Benchmarks aren't your data. Try both side by side in the playground, with the cost of every answer.