Claude Opus 5 vs Qwen3.7 Flash
At a Glance
| Compare | Claude Opus 5Anthropic |  Qwen3.7 FlashQwen |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $5.00Anthropic ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 | $0.030Openrouter ↗ · Oct 19, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $25.00Anthropic ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 | $0.13Openrouter ↗ · Oct 19, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 1,000K | 1,000K |
| Model facts checked | Aug 28, 2026View model evidence → | Sep 3, 2026View model evidence → |
Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →
Available Benchmarks
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Claude Opus 5 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Anthropic | Qwen |
| Family | Claude 5 | Qwen3 7 |
| Model | Claude Opus 5 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
| Version | Claude Opus 5 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-07-24 | 2026-07-15 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 1,000K | 1,000K |
| Total parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| Active parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | Unknown | Unknown |
| Open weights | No | No |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | No | No |
| Provider access | Anthropic (Standard), Deepinfra (Standard), Openrouter (Standard) | Alibaba Cloud Model Studio (Standard), Openrouter (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, tools | agents, chat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools, vision |
Claude Opus 5 Capabilities
Qwen3.7 Flash Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All image comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Claude Opus 5Anthropic | family variantsimage, text |
Claude Mythos 5.1Anthropic | vs | Claude Opus 5Anthropic | family variantsimage, text |
Claude Opus 5Anthropic | vs | Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic | family variantsimage, text |
Claude Haiku 4.5Anthropic | vs | Claude Opus 5Anthropic | family variantsimage, text |
Claude Opus 4.8Anthropic | vs | Claude Opus 5Anthropic | family variantsimage, text |
Claude Opus 5Anthropic | vs |  GPT-4.1OpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 5Anthropic | vs | GPT-4.1 NanoOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 5Anthropic | vs | GPT-5.4OpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 5Anthropic | vs | GPT-5.4 ProOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 5Anthropic | vs | GPT-5.5OpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 5Anthropic | vs | GPT-5.5 ProOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Opus 5Anthropic | vs | Grok 4.3xAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Claude Opus 5 vs Qwen3.7 Flash FAQs
Is Claude Opus 5 or Qwen3.7 Flash better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Claude Opus 5 and Qwen3.7 Flash, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5 or Qwen3.7 Flash?+
Claude Opus 5 is $5.00 and Qwen3.7 Flash is $0.030 per million tokens, so Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper on this metric. Claude Opus 5 is $25.00 and Qwen3.7 Flash is $0.13 per million tokens, so Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, Claude Opus 5 or Qwen3.7 Flash?+
Both models have the same sourced context window: 1,000,000 tokens each.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Claude Opus 5 or Qwen3.7 Flash?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can Claude Opus 5 or Qwen3.7 Flash be self-hosted?+
Both models have the same sourced self-hosting status: unsupported. Claude Opus 5 is not marked open weight; Qwen3.7 Flash is not marked open weight.
Can Claude Opus 5 and Qwen3.7 Flash understand images?+
Claude Opus 5 is documented with image input; Qwen3.7 Flash is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Claude Opus 5 or Qwen3.7 Flash?+
Claude Opus 5 has the larger sourced maximum output. Claude Opus 5 supports 128,000 tokens and Qwen3.7 Flash supports 65,536 tokens.
Do Claude Opus 5 and Qwen3.7 Flash support reasoning and tool use?+
Claude Opus 5: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Qwen3.7 Flash: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Claude Opus 5 or Qwen3.7 Flash?+
Claude Opus 5 has 3 sourced provider routes; Qwen3.7 Flash has 2, so Claude Opus 5 has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Claude Opus 5 or Qwen3.7 Flash?+
There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.