Claude Opus 4.7 vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Claude Opus 4.7 leads Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 40.7 to 39.9, and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B costs 4.2x less per output token ($6.00 vs $25.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 8 benchmarks have a result for both.
Claude Opus 4.7 or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: which to pick
Only Claude Opus 4.7 has a coding score, 67.5 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B for output tokens 4.2x cheaper ($6.00 vs $25.00 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 1M tokens).
- Shared results
- 8
- Claude Opus 4.7 only
- 101
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B only
- 1
- Like-for-like categories
- 6 of 9
Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only Claude Opus 4.7 has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Claude Opus 4.7
Claude Opus 4.7 leads, 40.7 against 39.9.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B leads, 50.1 against 38.6.
Same board, both measured
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only Claude Opus 4.7 has a GPQA Diamond result, 90.2%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only Claude Opus 4.7 has a AIME result, 96.3%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only Claude Opus 4.7 has a MMLU Pro result, 89.9%.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B takes 1.05M tokens against 1M.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Claude Opus 4.7 $0.018, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B $0.0050 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only Claude Opus 4.7 has the number, $2.95.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- Claude Opus 4.7 67.5 from 4 benchmarks, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Math, 11.1 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- AA Agentic Index: Claude Opus 4.7 38.6 against Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B 50.1, 11.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Claude Opus 4.7 $25.00 against Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B $6.00 per million output tokens, 4.2x apart.
- Context window
- Claude Opus 4.7 takes 1M tokens, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B 1.05M.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | Claude Opus 4.7 | Bars | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 1 | 0 | ||
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 2 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 2 | ||
| Math | 0 | 1 | ||
| General | 0 | 1 | ||
| All shared boards | 2 | 6 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1558 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| AA Coding Index | 73.6 | 71.9 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 85.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | 82.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 71.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | 43.9% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| ProgramBench (Vals AI) | 0.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | 68.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 54.1% | Only Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 54.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Terminal-Bench | 80.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| FrontierCode | 38.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| GSO-Bench | 44.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| WeirdML | 76.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| MirrorCode | 31.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1519 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1516 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: React | 1560 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1554 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: from an image | 1577 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| SWE Atlas: Codebase QnA | 40.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| SWE Atlas: Refactoring | 48.6% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| SWE Atlas: Test Writing | 38.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 40.7 | 39.9 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.8 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 38.6 | 50.1 | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | 51.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | 23.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | 38.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | 63.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 88.6% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| APEX-Agents | 49.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 18.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| PostTrainBench | 28.6% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Vending-Bench 2 | $10,937 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Search | 1230 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| MCP Atlas | 79.1% | 84.5% | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 90.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| MMMU Pro (Vals AI) | 85.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 91.4% | 93.5% | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 42.3% | 42.4% | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 90.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| ARC-AGI | 93.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 75.8% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| SimpleBench | 61.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Chess puzzles | 41.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | 28.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| EBR-bench | 19.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1506 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1521 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1508 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: diagrams | 1336 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: homework | 1337 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 80.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | 96.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 97.8% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 70.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| FrontierMath, tier 4 | 31.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| ProofBench | 54.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1498 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1509 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| MathArena | 20.4% | 31.6% | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | 89.9% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 85.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | 68.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 66.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 75.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | 70.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | 54.9% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| SimpleQA Verified | 51.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1508 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1495 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1504 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1490 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| FACTS Benchmark Suite | 45.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAGE (Vals AI) | 56.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | 83.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Vals Multimodal Index | 67.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| IFBench | 58.6% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 78.7% | 80.3% | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
| DTBench | 94.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMCA | 52.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Furniture assembly | 33.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| ExploitBench | 26.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text | 1490 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1498 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1486 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision | 1317 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1496 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1480 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1531 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: German | 1495 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1474 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1464 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: French | 1503 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1494 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1494 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Polish | 1489 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1505 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1505 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1492 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1474 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: English | 1322 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: Chinese | 1371 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: reading text | 1327 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: humor | 1309 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: recognizing things | 1278 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: creative writing | 1326 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Document | 1495 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1311 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | Anthropic Claude Opus 4.7 | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Anthropic | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | April 16, 2026 | August 12, 2026 |
| Context window | 1M | 1.05M |
| Input $/Mtok | $5.00 | $2.00 |
| Output $/Mtok | $25.00 | $6.00 |
| Coding index | 67.5 | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 4 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | $2.95 | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B for coding?
Only Claude Opus 4.7 has a coding score, 67.5 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B for output tokens 4.2x cheaper ($6.00 vs $25.00 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 1M tokens).
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.7 or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?
Claude Opus 4.7 costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $25.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B costs $2.00 and $6.00. Cost per solved task is known for Claude Opus 4.7 only.
Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 4.7 or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 4.7 vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B comparison based on?
8 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Claude Opus 4.7's coding index rests on 4 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.