Claude Opus 4.5 vs Qwen3.7 Plus Preview
Wins 1 of 8 areas
Long documents
Wins 5 of 8 areas
Agents · Reasoning · Images and charts · Math · Following instructions
Qwen3.7 Plus Preview is the stronger all-rounder.Claude Opus 4.5 is better at long documents.
Scores updated · 38 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the eight areas we test. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking03Qwen3.7 Plus Preview3 of 3 tests
- MathCompetition and research-level math02Qwen3.7 Plus Preview2 of 3 tests · 1 tie
- Images and chartsUnderstanding pictures, charts and video02Qwen3.7 Plus Preview2 of 2 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own12Qwen3.7 Plus Preview2 of 3 tests
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked01Qwen3.7 Plus Preview1 of 1 test
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Claude Opus 4.51 of 1 test
- CodingWriting and fixing software22Even2 each · 2 ties
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up11Even1 each
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 Plus Preview costs 93% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.
Where Qwen3.7 Plus Preview pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+33.3points ahead
- Follows unfamiliar, precisely checkable instructionsIFBench+20points ahead
- Reasoning about charts from research papersCharXiv (RQ)+18.7points ahead
Where Claude Opus 4.5 pulls ahead
- Real work tasks from 44 professionsGDPVal+33.9points ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+24.1points ahead
- Reasons across sets of long documentsAA-LCR+4.3points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 38 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingEven
- SWE-bench ProQwen3.7 Plus Preview by 5.65257.6+5.6
- LiveCodeBench v6Qwen3.7 Plus Preview by 4.884.889.6+4.8
- SciCodeClaude Opus 4.5 by 3.449.546.1+3.4
- SWE-bench VerifiedClaude Opus 4.5 by 3.280.977.7+3.2
- SWE-bench Multilingualtie76.275.8tie
- Terminal-Bench Hardtie4747tie
AgentsQwen3.7 Plus Preview
- GDPValClaude Opus 4.5 by 33.947.313.4+33.9
- MCP AtlasQwen3.7 Plus Preview by 10.962.373.2+10.9
- OSWorld-VerifiedQwen3.7 Plus Preview by 766.373.3+7
ReasoningQwen3.7 Plus Preview
- Humanity's Last ExamQwen3.7 Plus Preview by 5.530.135.6+5.5
- CritPtQwen3.7 Plus Preview by 4.54.69.1+4.5
- GPQA DiamondQwen3.7 Plus Preview by 3.486.690+3.4
FactsEven
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationQwen3.7 Plus Preview by 33.33972.3+33.3
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyClaude Opus 4.5 by 24.146.622.5+24.1
Images and chartsQwen3.7 Plus Preview
- CharXiv (RQ)Qwen3.7 Plus Preview by 18.767.285.9+18.7
- MMMU-ProQwen3.7 Plus Preview by 6.57480.5+6.5
MathQwen3.7 Plus Preview
- HMMT Feb. 2026Qwen3.7 Plus Preview by 7.685.392.9+7.6
- IMOAnswerBenchQwen3.7 Plus Preview by 7.578.586+7.5
- FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)tie34.434.4tie
Following instructionsQwen3.7 Plus Preview
- IFBenchQwen3.7 Plus Preview by 205878+20
Other results17 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.
- AA Agentic IndexClaude Opus 4.5 by 39.959.619.7+39.9
- WorldVQAQwen3.7 Plus Preview by 24.336.861.1+24.3
- MATH-VisionQwen3.7 Plus Preview by 13.277.190.3+13.2
- AA-OmniscienceClaude Opus 4.5 by 12.9141.1+12.9
- SimpleVQAQwen3.7 Plus Preview by 1269.781.7+12
- Terminal-Bench 2.0Qwen3.7 Plus Preview by 1159.370.3+11
- QwenClawBenchQwen3.7 Plus Preview by 9.552.361.8+9.5
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexQwen3.7 Plus Preview by 8.147.855.9+8.1
- AA IntelligenceClaude Opus 4.5 by 3.929.125.2+3.9
- OmniDocBench 1.5Qwen3.7 Plus Preview by 3.787.791.4+3.7
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Qwen3.7 Plus Preview by 3.589.593+3.5
- NL2RepoClaude Opus 4.5 by 2.143.241.1+2.1
- MMMLUClaude Opus 4.5 by 1.890.889+1.8
- MMLU-ProClaude Opus 4.5 by 1.59088.5+1.5
- MMLU-ReduxClaude Opus 4.5 by 1.195.694.5+1.1
- VideoMMMUQwen3.7 Plus Preview by 184.485.4+1
- SuperGPQAtie70.671.4tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude Opus 4.5 or Qwen3.7 Plus Preview?
Qwen3.7 Plus Preview wins five of the eight areas we test: agents, reasoning, images and charts, math and following instructions. Claude Opus 4.5 wins long documents. They are level on coding and facts.
Which is better for coding?
Neither. They win 2 coding tests each of the 6 both models report, and 2 are ties.
Which is cheaper?
Claude Opus 4.5 costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $25.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Plus Preview costs $0.40 and $1.60. That makes Qwen3.7 Plus Preview about 93% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 38 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 21 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 17 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.