Claude Opus 4.8 (Max) vs Qwen3.7 Max
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 4.8 (Max) by Anthropic or Qwen3.7 Max by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 4.8 (Max) scores 12.3 points higher (41.8 vs 29.5) but costs 3.0× as much to run the benchmark ($6874 vs $2277; both flagship class). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 4.8 (Max) when you need intelligence above 29.5, and Qwen3.7 Max when 29.5 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.8 (Max) | Qwen3.7 Max | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 41.8 | 29.5 | −29.4% Qwen3.7 Max is 29.4% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $6,873.86 | $2,277.12 | −66.9% Qwen3.7 Max is 66.9% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 37.99s | 16.67s | −56.1% Qwen3.7 Max is 56.1% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $5.00 / $25.0 | $2.50 / $7.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Qwen3.7 Max vs Claude Opus 4.8 (Max): 29.4% less intelligence, 66.9% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 56.1% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 4.8 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
- Qwen3.7 Max is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
Claude Opus 4.8 (Max)Qwen3.7 MaxToday's Pareto frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-4-8/qwen3-7-max · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-4-8/qwen3-7-max?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill