ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Claude Opus 4.1 vs Qwen3 Max

Too close to call on our weighted score (Qwen3 Max 50, Claude Opus 4.1 49). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. Anthropic

    Claude Opus 4.1

    Released Aug 5, 2025

    49/100
    • ECI144.1
    • Price$15.00 / $75.00
    • Context200K
    Full specs Remove Claude Opus 4.1

  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 Max

    Released Sep 23, 2025

    50/100
    • ECI142.4
    • Price$1.20 / $6.00
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3 Max

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Qwen3 Max 50/100, Claude Opus 4.1 49/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Claude Opus 4.1 for raw capability, Qwen3 Max on price and Qwen3 Max for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityClaude Opus 4.1Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Opus 4.1 144.1 · Qwen3 Max 142.4
  • Lowest priceQwen3 MaxQwen3 Max $2.40 · Claude Opus 4.1 $30.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3 MaxQwen3 Max 262,144 · Claude Opus 4.1 200,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsClaude Opus 4.1Claude Opus 4.1: Text, Images, PDFs · Qwen3 Max: Text
  • Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
How the score is built
MeasureWeightClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3 Max
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%7168
Price25%032
Inputs & features15%7025
Context window10%3237
Overall100%49/10050/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Claude Opus 4.1 vs Qwen3 Max specifications side by side
SpecificationClaude Opus 4.1AnthropicQwen3 MaxAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)144.1 (best)142.4
ECI rank#81 of 148 (best)#91 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions77.3% (best)72.6%
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics12.6%19.0% (best)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics68.9%73.3% (best)
SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues73.4%—
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions—48.8%
Price per million tokens
Input$15.00$1.20 (best)
Output$75.00$6.00 (best)
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$30.00$2.40 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 14 providersOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window200,000 tokens262,144 tokens (best)
Max output32,000 tokens65,536 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesNo
PDFsYesNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningYesNo
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
API model ID—qwen3-max
API providers1416 (best)
ReleasedAug 5, 2025Sep 23, 2025
Knowledge cutoffMar 31, 2025Apr 2025
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Claude Opus 4.1$300.00
  • Qwen3 Max$24.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Claude Opus 4.1 or Qwen3 Max?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Qwen3 Max 50/100, Claude Opus 4.1 49/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Claude Opus 4.1 for raw capability, Qwen3 Max on price and Qwen3 Max for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 or Qwen3 Max?

Qwen3 Max is cheaper at $1.20 input / $6.00 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Claude Opus 4.1 costs $15.00 input / $75.00 output per million tokens (median across 14 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $2.40 per million tokens for Qwen3 Max versus $30.00 for Claude Opus 4.1 (13× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Opus 4.1 144.1 (#81 of 148) and Qwen3 Max 142.4 (#91 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (141.6–146.0 vs 140.0–144.6), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Claude Opus 4.1 77.3%, Qwen3 Max 72.6%; FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — Qwen3 Max 19.0%, Claude Opus 4.1 12.6%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3 Max 73.3%, Claude Opus 4.1 68.9%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3 Max yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Claude Opus 4.1 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3 Max has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 200,000 for Claude Opus 4.1. Maximum output per response: Claude Opus 4.1 up to 32,000, Qwen3 Max up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Claude Opus 4.1 accepts text, images and PDFs; Qwen3 Max accepts text. Claude Opus 4.1 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

No. Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3 Max are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.

Which is newer?

Qwen3 Max is the newest, released Sep 23, 2025. Claude Opus 4.1 came out Aug 5, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Opus 4.1 Mar 31, 2025, Qwen3 Max Apr 2025.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons