ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3.7 Max vs Claude Opus 4.6

Too close to call on our weighted score (Claude Opus 4.6 61, Qwen3.7 Max 58). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.7 Max

    Released May 21, 2026

    58/100
    • ECI153.7
    • Price$2.50 / $7.50
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.7 Max

  2. Anthropic

    Claude Opus 4.6

    Released Feb 5, 2026

    61/100
    • ECI155.3
    • Price$5.00 / $25.00
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Claude Opus 4.6

  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 3 points (Claude Opus 4.6 61/100, Qwen3.7 Max 58/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Claude Opus 4.6 for raw capability and Qwen3.7 Max on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityClaude Opus 4.6Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Opus 4.6 155.3 · Qwen3.7 Max 153.7
  • Lowest priceQwen3.7 MaxQwen3.7 Max $3.75 · Claude Opus 4.6 $10.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextAbout the sameQwen3.7 Max 1,000,000 · Claude Opus 4.6 1,000,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsClaude Opus 4.6Qwen3.7 Max: Text · Claude Opus 4.6: Text, Images, PDFs
  • Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3.7 MaxClaude Opus 4.6
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%8385
Price25%232
Inputs & features15%3580
Context window10%6060
Overall100%58/10061/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Qwen3.7 Max vs Claude Opus 4.6 specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3.7 MaxAlibaba (Qwen)Claude Opus 4.6Anthropic
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)153.7155.3 (best)
ECI rank#37 of 148#27 of 148 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions90.9% (best)90.5%
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics64.6%66.0% (best)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics95.6% (best)94.4%
SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues77.3%78.7% (best)
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions55.8% (best)47.0%
Price per million tokens
Input$2.50 (best)$5.00
Output$7.50 (best)$25.00
Cached input$0.50$0.50
Blended (3:1)$3.75 (best)$10.00
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Alibaba APIOfficial Anthropic API
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens1,000,000 tokens
Max output65,536 tokens128,000 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoYes
PDFsNoYes
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningYesYeslow · medium · high · max
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
API model IDqwen3.7-maxclaude-opus-4-6
API providers2633 (best)
ReleasedMay 21, 2026Feb 5, 2026
Knowledge cutoff—May 31, 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.

  • Qwen3.7 Max$40.00
  • Claude Opus 4.6$100.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3.7 Max or Claude Opus 4.6?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 3 points (Claude Opus 4.6 61/100, Qwen3.7 Max 58/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Claude Opus 4.6 for raw capability and Qwen3.7 Max on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.7 Max or Claude Opus 4.6?

Qwen3.7 Max is cheaper at $2.50 input / $7.50 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Claude Opus 4.6 costs $5.00 input / $25.00 output per million tokens (official Anthropic API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $3.75 per million tokens for Qwen3.7 Max versus $10.00 for Claude Opus 4.6 (2.7× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Opus 4.6 155.3 (#27 of 148) and Qwen3.7 Max 153.7 (#37 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (153.4–157.3 vs 151.9–156.0), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Qwen3.7 Max 90.9%, Claude Opus 4.6 90.5%; FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — Claude Opus 4.6 66.0%, Qwen3.7 Max 64.6%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3.7 Max 95.6%, Claude Opus 4.6 94.4%; SWE-bench Verified — Claude Opus 4.6 78.7%, Qwen3.7 Max 77.3%; SimpleQA Verified — Qwen3.7 Max 55.8%, Claude Opus 4.6 47.0%.

Which is better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.6 resolves more real GitHub issues on SWE-bench Verified: Claude Opus 4.6 78.7% and Qwen3.7 Max 77.3%. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.7 Max and Claude Opus 4.6 share the same 1,000,000-token context window. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.7 Max up to 65,536, Claude Opus 4.6 up to 128,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3.7 Max accepts text; Claude Opus 4.6 accepts text, images and PDFs. Claude Opus 4.6 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

No. Qwen3.7 Max and Claude Opus 4.6 are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.7 Max is the newest, released May 21, 2026. Claude Opus 4.6 came out Feb 5, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Opus 4.6 May 31, 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