Skip to content
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Compare
  4. /
  5. Claude Opus 4.1vsQwen3.8 Max Prime
Updated Sep 2026

Claude Opus 4.1vsQwen3.8 Max Prime

Qwen3.8 Max Prime is cheaper than Claude Opus 4.1 at $4/M vs $15/M input tokens.

Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3.8 Max Prime compared across 19 shared prompts
SpecClaude Opus 4.1Qwen3.8 Max Prime
Input price$15/M tokens$4/M tokens
Output price$75/M tokens$12/M tokens
Context window200K tokens1.0M tokens
WeightsClosedClosed
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedAug 2025Sep 2026
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 6 of the 19 prompts both answered. Formatting stripped, words untouched.

Debug This Architecture

Here's the architecture for a real-time collaborative document editor (like Google Docs): **System Overview:** - Frontend: React SPA with…

Claude Opus 4.1538 words
Critical Issues Analysis Split-Brain Real-time Synchronization Problem: Users connected to different API servers experience 2+ second delays due to polling mechanism, creating divergent document states and poor collaboration experience.
Read the full answer
Qwen3.8 Max Prime2,271 words
Architecture Analysis: Failure Modes, Race Conditions & Scaling Bottlenecks SYNC & CONSISTENCY LAYER 1.1 Last-Write-Wins with Client Clocks (Critical) Failure Mode: Client clocks are unreliable. A user with a clock skewed +5 minutes will always "win" conflicts.
Read the full answer

Historical Counterfactual Analysis

If the transistor had been invented in 1920 instead of 1947, trace the likely technological, economic, and geopolitical implications through…

Claude Opus 4.11,201 words
The Transistor Timeline Shift: A Cascade of Consequences The 1920s-1930s: The Foundation Disruption Immediate Technical Revolution With the transistor arriving in 1920, likely from Bell Labs or a European research institution, the first decade would see rapid miniaturization of radio equipment.
Read the full answer
Qwen3.8 Max Prime2,943 words
The Transistor in 1920: A Counterfactual History Through 1980 Preamble: The Invention Itself The transistor's actual invention required quantum mechanical understanding of semiconductor behavior. In 1920, this theory didn't yet exist.
Read the full answer

Mini LBO Underwrite

You are underwriting a 5-year LBO for a private equity investment committee. Company (fictional): HarborTech Services (HTS) –…

Claude Opus 4.1364 words
SIMPLIFIED LBO MODEL Entry Calculations Enterprise Value: 12.0x × $120m = $1,440m Transaction Fees: 2.0% × $1,440m = $28.8m Term Loan: 4.0x × $120m = $480m Mezzanine: 1.5x × $120m = $180m Total Debt: $660m Equity Investment: $1,440m - $660m + $28.8m = $808.8m Year-by-Year Projections (FY2026-FY2030) $ millions FY2026…
Read the full answer
Qwen3.8 Max Prime673 words
HarborTech Services (HTS) – LBO Underwriting Memo Entry & Capital Structure Item Amount FY2025 EBITDA $120.0m Entry Multiple 12.0x Enterprise Value $1,440.0m Transaction Fees (2.0% of EV) $28.8m Total Uses $1,468.8m Term Loan (4.0x, 9.0% cash, 1.0% amort) $480.0m Mezzanine (1.5x, 12.0% cash + 2.0% PIK) $180.0m Sponsor…
Read the full answer

Adversarial Contract Review

Here is a contract for a software consulting engagement: --- SOFTWARE CONSULTING AGREEMENT This Agreement is entered into between TechCorp…

Claude Opus 4.1695 words
This contract is extremely one-sided and contains numerous exploitative clauses. Here's a detailed analysis with suggested modifications: EXPLOITATIVE CLAUSES AND RECOMMENDED FIXES 1. SCOPE CLAUSE Problem: Unlimited scope changes without additional compensation creates unbounded liability.
Read the full answer
Qwen3.8 Max Prime2,126 words
Contract Analysis: Exploitative Clauses & Recommended Modifications Executive Summary This agreement is severely one-sided in favor of the Client. Nearly every clause shifts risk, cost, or obligation onto the Contractor while granting the Client broad unilateral rights. Below is a clause-by-clause breakdown.
Read the full answer

Michelin Star Recipe Design

Design an innovative recipe for a multi-component dish worthy of a Michelin 3-star restaurant. The recipe should feature an unusual…

Claude Opus 4.1733 words
"Tidal Reverie" White Miso-Aged Hamachi with Coffee Soil, Yuzu Pearls, and Crystallized Seaweed Conceptual Narrative This dish explores the liminal space between land and sea, where morning coffee meets ocean depths.
Read the full answer
Qwen3.8 Max Prime1,844 words
"Petrichor" The Forest Floor After Rain Conceptual Narrative Petrichor — from the Greek petra (stone) and ichor (the fluid that flows in the veins of the gods) — is the scent produced when rain falls on dry earth.
Read the full answer

Startup Pitch Teardown

Here's a pitch deck summary for a startup called "MindMeld AI": **Slide 1 - Vision:** "We're building the future of human-AI collaboration.…

Claude Opus 4.1396 words
Here are the three weakest claims in the MindMeld AI pitch: "94% accuracy" for EEG-based text prediction (Slide 3) Why it's weak: Current state-of-the-art non-invasive EEG systems struggle to achieve even 70% accuracy for simple binary choices, let alone complex text prediction Academic research shows consumer-grade…
Read the full answer
Qwen3.8 Max Prime834 words
The 3 Weakest Claims in the MindMeld AI Pitch The TAM Calculation (Slide 4) The Claim: "We're targeting the 3.5 billion smartphone users worldwide. TAM: $180B." Why it's weak: This is a textbook example of TAM inflation that will immediately erode investor trust.
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
Claude Opus 4.1
Claude Opus 4.1
Qwen3.8 Max Prime
Qwen3.8 Max Prime

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, nothing separates them.

Qwen3.8 Max Prime costs 6.3x less per token.

Too close to call

Reviewing agent-written code?See a Brief PR report

API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

Claude Opus 4.1
Input
$15.00
Output
$75.00
Qwen3.8 Max Prime
Input
$4.00
3.8× cheaper
Output
$12.00
6.3× cheaper

Qwen3.8 Max Prime is cheaper on both: 3.8× input, 6.3× output.

Where to run it

2 hosts

Claude Opus 4.11 host
HostInOutContextUptime
Amazon Bedrock$15.00 in·$75.00 out·200k·100% up
Qwen3.8 Max Prime1 host
HostInOutContextUptime
Alibaba Cloud$4.00 in·$12.00 out·1M·99.9% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 25 Sep 2026.

Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

Claude Opus 4.1 is developed by Anthropic while Qwen3.8 Max Prime is developed by Qwen. Claude Opus 4.1 has a 200K token context window vs Qwen3.8 Max Prime's 1.0M. You can compare their actual outputs across 19 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3.8 Max Prime each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 19 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

Claude Opus 4.1 costs $15/M input tokens and Qwen3.8 Max Prime costs $4/M input tokens. Qwen3.8 Max Prime is $11.00/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of Claude Opus 4.1 and Qwen3.8 Max Prime across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.

Keep exploring

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

Claude Opus 4.1 logoSolar Mini 4 logo
Claude Opus 4.1 vs Solar Mini 4Landed Sep 2026
Qwen3.8 Max Prime logoGLM 5.3 Prime logo
Qwen3.8 Max Prime vs GLM 5.3 PrimeLanded Sep 2026
Claude Opus 4.1 logoQwen3.8 Omni Flash logo
Claude Opus 4.1 vs Qwen3.8 Omni FlashLanded Sep 2026
Qwen3.8 Max Prime logoCommand A+ logo
Qwen3.8 Max Prime vs Command A+Landed Sep 2026
Claude Opus 4.1 logoClaude Opus 5.5 logo
Claude Opus 4.1 vs Claude Opus 5.5Landed Sep 2026
Qwen3.8 Max Prime logoGPT-6 Luna Pro logo
Qwen3.8 Max Prime vs GPT-6 Luna ProLanded Sep 2026
Claude Opus 4.1 logoGPT-6 Sol Pro logo
Claude Opus 4.1 vs GPT-6 Sol ProLanded Sep 2026
Qwen3.8 Max Prime logoGPT-6 Luna logo
Qwen3.8 Max Prime vs GPT-6 LunaLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

Claude Opus 4.1 logoClaude Opus 4 logo
Claude Opus 4.1 vs Claude Opus 4Version compare
Claude Opus 4.1 logoClaude Opus 4.6 logo
Claude Opus 4.1 vs Claude Opus 4.6Version compare
Qwen3.8 Max Prime logoQwen3.8 Omni Flash logo
Qwen3.8 Max Prime vs Qwen3.8 Omni FlashSame lab
Qwen3.8 Max Prime logoQwen3.7 Flash logo
Qwen3.8 Max Prime vs Qwen3.7 FlashSame lab
Claude Opus 4.1 logoCommand A+ logo
Claude Opus 4.1 vs Command A+New provider
Qwen3.8 Max Prime logoCypher Alpha (free) logo
Qwen3.8 Max Prime vs Cypher Alpha (free)Same size
Qwen3.8 Max Prime logoDeepSeek V3.1 logo
Qwen3.8 Max Prime vs DeepSeek V3.1New provider
Claude Opus 4.1 logoDeepSeek R1 logo
Claude Opus 4.1 vs DeepSeek R1New provider

Model pages

Claude Opus 4.1 logo
Claude Opus 4.157 outputs, specs and price
Qwen3.8 Max Prime logo
Qwen3.8 Max Prime19 outputs, specs and price
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed