Compare / Qwen3.7-Max vs Claude Opus 4.5

Qwen3.7-Max vs Claude Opus 4.5

Which is cheaper, which is more capable, and which does better at each kind of work, from 8 results on 2 sources that measured both models.

AlibabaQwen3.7-Max Released 19 May 2026 · $1.48 in · $4.42 out
AnthropicClaude Opus 4.5 Released 24 Nov 2025 · $5.00 in · $25.00 out
Qwen3.7-Max wins 8Claude Opus 4.5 wins 0

Of the 8 results both models have, the better value on each. Results whose reported ranges overlap are too close to call.

Results as of 9 October 2026 (catalogue release 2026-10-09-dd620e778ac5). See also Alibaba vs Anthropic, every model from both labs.

Qwen3.7-Max or Claude Opus 4.5? The short answer

They score about the same, so pick Qwen3.7-Max: it costs 4.5 times less per token.

  • Qwen3.7-Max is cheaper: $2.21 against $10.00 per million tokens, 4.5 times less.
  • They score about the same on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (29.5 and 29.1).
  • Qwen3.7-Max is newer: released 19 May 2026, against 24 Nov 2025 for Claude Opus 4.5.
  • On third-party benchmarks, on the results both models have: Qwen3.7-Max does better for reasoning and knowledge and sticking to the facts.

Head to head

29.5
Intelligence Index
29.1
$2.21
Price per million tokens, blendedlower is better
$10.00
1,000,000
Context window, tokens
200,000

Every fact side by side

Qwen3.7-MaxClaude Opus 4.5
Price per million tokens$1.48 in · $4.42 out$5.00 in · $25.00 out
Blended (3 in : 1 out)$2.21$10.00
Cheapest host, blended–$10.00 (Amazon Bedrock)
Intelligence Index29.529.1
Spring Prompt overall––
Output speed, tokens a second––
Context window1,000,000 tokens200,000 tokens
Released19 May 2026 (newer)24 Nov 2025
WeightsClosedClosed
Developer based inChinathe 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.

Agents and tool useMulti-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls 69 of 164 36 of 164
Professional workReal tasks from banking, consulting and law, business documents and freelance projects not measured 28 of 51
Reasoning and knowledgeHard questions across science, maths and general knowledge 39 of 198 65 of 198
WritingWhat people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality not measured 17 of 188
Sticking to the factsSummarising without inventing things, and factual answers 31 of 152 72 of 152

From our research

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.

MeasureQwen3.7-MaxClaude Opus 4.5
Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 3 results
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Indexindex score, higher is better 53 · 55 of 243 measured 29.5 29.1thinking reasoning
GPQA Diamond% of questions, higher is better 21 · 69 of 231 measured 92.3% 86.6%thinking reasoning
Humanity's Last Exam% of questions, higher is better 39 · 72 of 242 measured 40.5% 30.1%thinking reasoning
SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI) reported by SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI) · 1 result
Correct answers% of questions, higher is better 18 · 36 of 76 measured 55.8% 45.7%thinking-32k reasoning
Show all 8 results (4 more)
MeasureQwen3.7-MaxClaude Opus 4.5
Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 4 results
IFBench% of instructions, higher is better 5 · 84 of 195 measured 80.5% 58.0%thinking reasoning
Long-context reasoning (AA-LCR)% of questions, higher is better 50 · 66 of 233 measured 79.0% 77.3%thinking reasoning
Terminal-Bench Hard% of tasks, higher is better 12 · 15 of 190 measured 50.8% 47.0%thinking reasoning
τ²-bench telecom% of tasks, higher is better 22 · 44 of 193 measured 94.7% 89.5%thinking reasoning

Quick answers

Is Qwen3.7-Max better than Claude Opus 4.5?

They score about the same, so pick Qwen3.7-Max: it costs 4.5 times less per token.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.7-Max or Claude Opus 4.5?

Qwen3.7-Max is cheaper: $2.21 against $10.00 per million tokens, 4.5 times less.

Which is better for agents and tool use, Qwen3.7-Max or Claude Opus 4.5?

Claude Opus 4.5 ranks 36 of 164 models on sale for multi-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls, against 69 for Qwen3.7-Max.

Which is better for reasoning and knowledge, Qwen3.7-Max or Claude Opus 4.5?

Qwen3.7-Max ranks 39 of 198 models on sale for hard questions across science, maths and general knowledge, against 65 for Claude Opus 4.5.

Which is better for sticking to the facts, Qwen3.7-Max or Claude Opus 4.5?

Qwen3.7-Max ranks 31 of 152 models on sale for summarising without inventing things, and factual answers, against 72 for Claude Opus 4.5.

Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3.7-Max or Claude Opus 4.5?

Qwen3.7-Max: 1,000,000 tokens, against 200,000 for Claude Opus 4.5.

Run Qwen3.7-Max and Claude Opus 4.5 on your own prompt

Benchmarks aren't your data. Try both side by side in the playground, with the cost of every answer.

Try the playgroundTalk to us