Qwen3.7-Max vs Claude Opus 4.7: long-running agents compared
FastMetal no longer offers Claude Opus 4.7. This comparison is kept as a record; Qwen3.7-Max is still served, and the Claude models we serve today are on the models page.
Alibaba's Qwen3.7-Max and Anthropic's Claude Opus 4.7 are closed flagship models aimed at the same job: agents that run on their own for hours. Qwen has plenty of open-weight models, but the Max tier is closed.
The short version: Qwen3.7-Max for long-running agent endurance, Claude Opus 4.7 for multimodal input and the Anthropic ecosystem.
Specs
| Qwen3.7-Max | Claude Opus 4.7 | |
|---|---|---|
| Lab | Alibaba | Anthropic |
| FastMetal model id | qwen3.7-max | no longer served |
| License | Closed | Closed |
| Context window | ~1M tokens | 1M tokens |
| Input | Text only | Text, images, files |
| Best at | Long autonomous runs | Long-running agents, multimodal work |
Qwen3.7-Max costs $2.64 per million input tokens and $7.92 per million output tokens on FastMetal's USD list as of October 26, 2026. Current figures are on the Qwen3.7-Max model page.
Where each is stronger
Qwen3.7-Max is built to keep going. Reviews put it ahead of Opus 4.7 on agentic coding benchmarks:
| Benchmark | Qwen3.7-Max | Claude Opus 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | 69.7 | 65.4 |
| SWE-Bench Pro | 60.6 | 57.3 |
| MCP-Atlas | 76.4 | 75.8 |
Alibaba's own write-up describes a 35-hour autonomous CUDA kernel optimization run: 1,158 tool calls, ending in a 10x speedup.
Claude Opus 4.7 is the Opus generation designed for asynchronous agents that run for a long time. Besides coding and agent work, it takes images and files as input, handles high-resolution vision, and fits naturally with Anthropic's tooling such as Claude Code.
Weak spots
Qwen3.7-Max: text only. It can't read images or files, and it doesn't fit a requirement for open weights. Also, its strong SWE-Multilingual score measures coding across programming languages, not writing quality in any human language.
Claude Opus 4.7: cost. It's in a high price tier, and long agent runs burn a lot of tokens. It also trails Qwen3.7-Max on some of the agentic benchmarks above.
Which to use where
- Qwen3.7-Max: long, multi-step autonomous work, and automation heavy on terminal commands and tool calls.
- Claude Opus 4.7: work that needs image or file input, or a team already standardized on Claude tooling. On FastMetal today, that means one of the newer Claude models instead; see Claude Opus 4.8 vs Qwen3.7-Max and Claude Opus 5 vs Qwen3.7-Max.
Try Qwen3.7-Max
curl https://api.fastmetal.ai/v1/chat/completions \
-H "Authorization: Bearer $FASTMETAL_API_KEY" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{"model": "qwen3.7-max", "messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "Hello"}]}'
The same key reaches every other model in the catalog, so comparing it against a current Claude model means changing model and nothing else.
FAQ
Is Qwen3.7-Max an open model? No. Many Qwen models ship open weights, but the Max tier is closed.
Which is better for agents? On the reported agentic benchmarks, Qwen3.7-Max beat Opus 4.7. Opus 4.7 was ahead on multimodal input and on how well it fits the Claude toolchain.
Which is better outside English? We couldn't find a published benchmark that isolates non-English quality for either model. If your work is mostly in another language, test with your own prompts.
Can I still use Claude Opus 4.7 on FastMetal? No. It has left the catalog. The Claude models we serve now are listed on the models page.