Claude Opus 4.1 vs Qwen: Qwen3 Max Thinking

Compare Claude Opus 4.1 by Anthropic against Qwen: Qwen3 Max Thinking by Qwen, context windows of 200K vs 262K, tested across 27 shared challenges. Updated April 2026.

Which is better, Claude Opus 4.1 or Qwen: Qwen3 Max Thinking?

Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen: Qwen3 Max Thinking are both competitive models. Claude Opus 4.1 costs $15/M input tokens vs $1.2/M for Qwen: Qwen3 Max Thinking. Context windows: 200K vs 262K tokens. Compare their real outputs side by side below.

Key Differences Between Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen: Qwen3 Max Thinking

Claude Opus 4.1 is made by anthropic while Qwen: Qwen3 Max Thinking is from qwen. Claude Opus 4.1 has a 200K token context window compared to Qwen: Qwen3 Max Thinking's 262K. On pricing, Claude Opus 4.1 costs $15/M input tokens vs $1.2/M for Qwen: Qwen3 Max Thinking.

Our Verdict
Claude Opus 4.1
Claude Opus 4.1
Qwen: Qwen3 Max Thinking
Qwen: Qwen3 Max Thinking

No community votes yet. On paper, these are closely matched - try both with your actual task to see which fits your workflow.

Qwen: Qwen3 Max Thinking is 13x cheaper per token — worth considering if cost matters.

Too close to call
Writing DNA

Style Comparison

Similarity
98%

Claude Opus 4.1 uses 5.9x more sentence length

Claude Opus 4.1
Qwen: Qwen3 Max Thinking
61%Vocabulary61%
87wSentence Length15w
0.54Hedging0.23
5.1Bold5.2
6.7Lists3.9
0.38Emoji1.37
1.68Headings1.22
0.13Transitions0.04
Based on 17 + 13 text responses
vs

Ask them anything yourself

Claude Opus 4.1Qwen: Qwen3 Max Thinking

279 AI models invented the same fake scientist.

We read every word. 250 models. 2.14 million words. This is what we found.

AI Hallucination Index 2026
Free preview13 of 58 slides
FAQ

Common questions