Compare / Qwen3.8-Max (0902) vs Claude Opus 4.7

Qwen3.8-Max (0902) vs Claude Opus 4.7

Which is cheaper, which is more capable, and which does better at each kind of work, from 18 results on 5 sources that measured both models.

AlibabaQwen3.8-Max (0902) Released 3 Aug 2026 · $2.00 in · $6.00 out
AnthropicClaude Opus 4.7 Released 16 Apr 2026 · $5.00 in · $25.00 out
Qwen3.8-Max (0902) wins 101 too close to callClaude Opus 4.7 wins 7

Of the 18 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.

Qwen3.8-Max (0902) or Claude Opus 4.7? The short answer

Pick Qwen3.8-Max (0902): it scores higher (Intelligence Index 45.4 against 40.7) and costs less.

  • Qwen3.8-Max (0902) is cheaper: $3.00 against $10.00 per million tokens, 3.3 times less.
  • Qwen3.8-Max (0902) scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index: 45.4 against 40.7.
  • Qwen3.8-Max (0902) is newer: released 3 Aug 2026, against 16 Apr 2026 for Claude Opus 4.7.
  • On third-party benchmarks, on the results both models have: Qwen3.8-Max (0902) does better for agents and tool use, professional work and reasoning and knowledge; Claude Opus 4.7 for writing and sticking to the facts.

Head to head

45.4
Intelligence Index
40.7
$3.00
Price per million tokens, blendedlower is better
$10.00
1,000,000
Context window, tokens
1,000,000

Every fact side by side

Qwen3.8-Max (0902)Claude Opus 4.7
Price per million tokens$2.00 in · $6.00 out$5.00 in · $25.00 out
Blended (3 in : 1 out)$3.00$10.00
Cheapest host, blended–$10.00 (Amazon Bedrock)
Intelligence Index45.440.7
Spring Prompt overall48–
Output speed, tokens a second37–
Context window1,000,000 tokens1,000,000 tokens
Released3 Aug 2026 (newer)16 Apr 2026
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.

Product listingsTurning a sparse product feed and photos into listings that can go live 17 of 20 not measured
Decks from an analysisTurning a finished analysis into a deck you could present as it is 11 of 19 not measured
Marketing planningPlanning a year of ad spend without overspending 14 of 19 not measured
Agents and tool useMulti-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls 7 of 164 25 of 164
Professional workReal tasks from banking, consulting and law, business documents and freelance projects 18 of 51 23 of 51
Reasoning and knowledgeHard questions across science, maths and general knowledge 17 of 198 27 of 198
WritingWhat people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality 16 of 188 25 of 188
Sticking to the factsSummarising without inventing things, and factual answers 38 of 152 52 of 152
Speed under pressureGood decisions against a real clock (fast chess) 24 of 24 not measured

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.

MeasureQwen3.8-Max (0902)Claude Opus 4.7
Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 3 results
Overall · TextArena rating, higher is better 20 · 5 of 387 measured 1,482 1,501high reasoning
Overall · Text factualityArena rating, higher is better 22 · 14 of 163 measured 1,472 1,477high reasoning
Business, management and finance · TextArena rating, higher is better 16 · 3 of 380 measured 1,484 1,508high reasoning
Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 3 results
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Indexindex score, higher is better 14 · 23 of 243 measured 45.4 40.7max reasoning
GPQA Diamond% of questions, higher is better 15 · 28 of 231 measured 92.8% 91.4%max reasoning
Humanity's Last Exam% of questions, higher is better 24 · 32 of 242 measured 43.1% 42.3%max reasoning
GDP.pdf reported by GDP.pdf · 1 result
Professional document tasks% of rubric, higher is better 13 · 16 of 32 measured 23.2%xhigh reasoning 21.0%max reasoning
SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI) reported by SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI) · 1 result
Correct answers% of questions, higher is better 30 · 22 of 76 measured 47.3%xhigh reasoning 51.7%xhigh reasoning
τ²-bench reported by τ²-bench · 2 results
Consistency (pass^4) · tau2 v1.0.1, banking knowledge, alltools retrieval% of tasks, higher is better 1 · 7 of 21 measured 35.1%xhigh reasoning, tau2 24.7%max reasoning, tau2
Task success (pass^1) · tau2 v1.0.1, banking knowledge, alltools retrieval% of tasks, higher is better 1 · 7 of 21 measured 55.2%xhigh reasoning, tau2 40.2%max reasoning, tau2
Show all 18 results (8 more)
MeasureQwen3.8-Max (0902)Claude Opus 4.7
Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 4 results
Creative writing · TextArena rating, higher is better 17 · 6 of 385 measured 1,468 1,489high reasoning
Expert prompts · TextArena rating, higher is better 20 · 9 of 338 measured 1,513 1,534high reasoning
Instruction following · TextArena rating, higher is better 25 · 5 of 387 measured 1,474 1,502high reasoning
Writing, literature and language · TextArena rating, higher is better 18 · 5 of 386 measured 1,472 1,497high reasoning
Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 4 results
Terminal-Bench 2.1% of tasks, higher is better 5 · 18 of 130 measured 88.8% 83.1%max reasoning
τ-bench banking% of tasks, higher is better 7 · 27 of 121 measured 47.8% 34.6%max reasoning
Artificial Analysis Coding Indexindex score, higher is better 10 · 16 of 131 measured 76.2 73.6max reasoning
Long-context reasoning (AA-LCR)% of questions, higher is better 35 · 53 of 233 measured 80.3% 78.7%max reasoning

Quick answers

Is Qwen3.8-Max (0902) better than Claude Opus 4.7?

Pick Qwen3.8-Max (0902): it scores higher (Intelligence Index 45.4 against 40.7) and costs less.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.8-Max (0902) or Claude Opus 4.7?

Qwen3.8-Max (0902) is cheaper: $3.00 against $10.00 per million tokens, 3.3 times less.

Which is better for agents and tool use, Qwen3.8-Max (0902) or Claude Opus 4.7?

Qwen3.8-Max (0902) ranks 7 of 164 models on sale for multi-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls, against 25 for Claude Opus 4.7.

Which is better for professional work, Qwen3.8-Max (0902) or Claude Opus 4.7?

Qwen3.8-Max (0902) ranks 18 of 51 models on sale for real tasks from banking, consulting and law, business documents and freelance projects, against 23 for Claude Opus 4.7.

Which is better for reasoning and knowledge, Qwen3.8-Max (0902) or Claude Opus 4.7?

Qwen3.8-Max (0902) ranks 17 of 198 models on sale for hard questions across science, maths and general knowledge, against 27 for Claude Opus 4.7.

Which is better for writing, Qwen3.8-Max (0902) or Claude Opus 4.7?

Qwen3.8-Max (0902) ranks 16 of 188 models on sale for what people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality, against 25 for Claude Opus 4.7.

Which is better for sticking to the facts, Qwen3.8-Max (0902) or Claude Opus 4.7?

Qwen3.8-Max (0902) ranks 38 of 152 models on sale for summarising without inventing things, and factual answers, against 52 for Claude Opus 4.7.

Run Qwen3.8-Max (0902) 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.

Try the playgroundTalk to us