Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Nothing here. The model returned empty. We stared at it for a while.
Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs Qwen: Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Compare Claude 3.7 Sonnet by Anthropic against Qwen: Qwen3.5 397B A17B by Qwen, context windows of 200K vs 262K, tested across 53 shared challenges. Updated April 2026.
Which is better, Claude 3.7 Sonnet or Qwen: Qwen3.5 397B A17B?
Claude 3.7 Sonnet and Qwen: Qwen3.5 397B A17B are both competitive models. Claude 3.7 Sonnet costs $3/M input tokens vs $0.6/M for Qwen: Qwen3.5 397B A17B. Context windows: 200K vs 262K tokens. Compare their real outputs side by side below.
Key Differences Between Claude 3.7 Sonnet and Qwen: Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Claude 3.7 Sonnet is made by anthropic while Qwen: Qwen3.5 397B A17B is from qwen. Claude 3.7 Sonnet has a 200K token context window compared to Qwen: Qwen3.5 397B A17B's 262K. On pricing, Claude 3.7 Sonnet costs $3/M input tokens vs $0.6/M for Qwen: Qwen3.5 397B A17B.
Our Verdict
Qwen: Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Claude 3.7 SonnetRunner-up
No community votes yet. On paper, Qwen: Qwen3.5 397B A17B has the edge — bigger model tier, newer.
Qwen: Qwen3.5 397B A17B is 4.2x cheaper per token — worth considering if cost matters.
Too close to call
Writing DNA
Style Comparison
Similarity
97%
Qwen: Qwen3.5 397B A17B uses 22.8x more emoji
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Qwen: Qwen3.5 397B A17B
62%Vocabulary54%
35wSentence Length14w
0.99Hedging0.39
1.2Bold6.9
4.3Lists4.2
0.00Emoji0.23
1.78Headings0.93
0.23Transitions0.17
Based on 13 + 23 text responses
vsAsk them anything yourself
279 AI models invented the same fake scientist.
We read every word. 250 models. 2.14 million words. This is what we found.
Free preview13 of 58 slides
FAQ