Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) vs Qwen3.7 Max
Which is better for the money: Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or Qwen3.7 Max by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Max, Default Fallbac… scores 26.5 points higher (56.0 vs 29.5) but costs 3.2× as much to run the benchmark ($7260 vs $2277; both flagship class). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Max, Default Fallbac… when you need intelligence above 29.5, and Qwen3.7 Max when 29.5 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) | Qwen3.7 Max | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 56.0 | 29.5 | −47.3% Qwen3.7 Max is 47.3% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $7,259.50 | $2,277.12 | −68.6% Qwen3.7 Max is 68.6% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 409.04s | 16.63s | −95.9% Qwen3.7 Max is 95.9% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $10.0 | $2.50 / $7.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Qwen3.7 Max vs Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback): 47.3% less intelligence, 68.6% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 95.9% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) 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 Sonnet 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback)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-sonnet-5-5/qwen3-7-max · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-sonnet-5-5/qwen3-7-max?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill