Claude Opus 4 vs Qwen3.7 Max
Wins 0 of 4 areas
—
Wins 4 of 4 areas
Coding · Reasoning · Long documents · Following instructions
Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger all-rounder.
Scores updated · 18 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the four areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
Long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
Qwen3.7 Max costs 89% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Qwen3.7 Max pulls ahead
- Recent programming contest problemsLiveCodeBench v6+44.2points ahead
- Very hard expert questions across many subjectsHumanity's Last Exam+28.2points ahead
- Follows unfamiliar, precisely checkable instructionsIFBench+26.8points ahead
Where Claude Opus 4 pulls ahead
No clear win on a test scored out of 100.
Every test, side by side
All 18 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingQwen3.7 Max
- LiveCodeBench v6Qwen3.7 Max by 44.247.491.6+44.2
- Terminal-Bench HardQwen3.7 Max by 19.731.150.8+19.7
- SciCodeQwen3.7 Max by 9.739.849.5+9.7
- SWE-bench VerifiedQwen3.7 Max by 7.972.580.4+7.9
ReasoningQwen3.7 Max
- Humanity's Last ExamQwen3.7 Max by 28.212.340.5+28.2
- GPQA DiamondQwen3.7 Max by 12.779.692.3+12.7
- SimpleBenchQwen3.7 Max by 11.658.870.4+11.6
Following instructionsQwen3.7 Max
- IFBenchQwen3.7 Max by 26.853.780.5+26.8
Other results9 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexQwen3.7 Max by 323466+32
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Qwen3.7 Max by 21.373.494.7+21.3
- SuperGPQAQwen3.7 Max by 17.156.573.6+17.1
- AA IntelligenceQwen3.7 Max by 8.920.629.5+8.9
- IFEvalQwen3.7 Max by 6.987.494.3+6.9
- MMLU-ProQwen3.7 Max by 386.689.6+3
- MMMLUQwen3.7 Max by 1.588.890.3+1.5
- MMLU-Reduxtie94.295tie
- LiveBenchtie74.674.3tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude Opus 4 or Qwen3.7 Max?
Qwen3.7 Max wins all four areas where both have results: coding, reasoning, long documents and following instructions. Claude Opus 4 wins none.
Which is better for coding?
Qwen3.7 Max. It wins 4 of the 4 coding tests both models report; Claude Opus 4 wins none.
Which is cheaper?
Claude Opus 4 costs $15.00 per million input tokens and $75.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Max costs $2.50 and $7.50. That makes Qwen3.7 Max about 89% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 18 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 9 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 9 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.