Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) vs Qwen3.7 Plus
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or Qwen3.7 Plus by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) scores 32.4 points higher (57.6 vs 25.2) but costs 20× as much to run the benchmark ($8708 vs $428; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) when you need intelligence above 25.2, and Qwen3.7 Plus when 25.2 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) | Qwen3.7 Plus | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 57.6 | 25.2 | −56.3% Qwen3.7 Plus is 56.3% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $8,708.20 | $427.73 | −95.1% Qwen3.7 Plus is 95.1% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 626.13s | 44.78s | −92.8% Qwen3.7 Plus is 92.8% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $4.00 / $20.0 | $0.40 / $1.60 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.7 Plus vs Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback): 56.3% less intelligence, 95.1% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 92.8% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- Qwen3.7 Plus is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback)Qwen3.7 PlusToday'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-5-5/qwen3-7-plus · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5/qwen3-7-plus?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill