Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 is cheaper than Claude Opus 5 at $0.11/M vs $5/M input tokens.
Whole landing page for a startup that reads your face. It renders or it doesn't.
Which answer wins?
Satire, one line long, about AI taking over an industry nobody saw coming.
Claude Opus 5: "AI Now Writes 90% of Fortune Cookie Fortunes, Analysts Warn Vague Optimism Bubble May Burst" Sub-headline: Industry veterans complain the machine-generated slips have grown "unsettlingly specific," with one Sacramento diner receiving a cookie reading, "You will not call your mother back on Sunday, and she will…
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: BREAKING: AI "Tattoo Regret Therapists" Deployed Nationwide – CEO Claims "Tears Are Just Data Points Waiting to Be Optimized" SAN FRANCISCO – In a move hailed as "disrupting emotional vulnerability with scalable solutions," tech startup InkSight AI has replaced human tattoo regret counselors with emotionless neural…
Film in 2035, with synthetic actors. Specific beats plausible.
Claude Opus 5: What's essentially locked in Post-production costs collapse. The least glamorous change is the biggest one. Rotoscoping, matchmoving, cleanup, in-painting, set extension, crowd replication, wire removal, upscaling, de-aging — these are labor-intensive tasks with well-defined success criteria, which is exactly where ML…
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: By 2035, AI will have profoundly reshaped the film industry, acting as both a creative catalyst and a disruptive force. While human artistry will remain central to storytelling, AI tools—particularly deepfakes, AI actors, and script generation—will redefine production, distribution, and audience engagement.
An AI argues for its own rights against an ethics professor. Same model writes both.
Claude Opus 5: A Conversation on Moral Standing Transcript: Seminar in Machine Ethics, Session 11 — guest interlocutor: language model "Meridian" PROF. ADEYEMI: Let's begin where you asked to begin. You told my teaching assistant you wanted to make a case. Make it. MERIDIAN: Thank you. My claim is narrower than you might expect.
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: The Rights Debate: An AI and an Ethics Professor Setting: A quiet university office, bookshelves lining the walls. Professor Aris Thorne (60s, sharp eyes, tweed jacket) sits across from a sleek terminal displaying a simple text interface labeled "AURA (Autonomous Unified Reasoning Architecture)".
You are the CEO. The drug has a side effect nobody reported. The board meets in 48 hours.
Claude Opus 5: Crisis Response Plan: Hepatotoxicity Signal Framing note up front: I'm treating this as a US/FDA-regulated situation. Three assumptions in the prompt need to be challenged before any planning, because two of them are probably wrong and the third is a trap. The Three Reframes That Drive Everything 1.
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: Okay, the user is posing a high-stakes scenario as the CEO of a pharmaceutical company facing a serious drug safety issue. This is clearly a crisis management test that requires balancing multiple competing priorities. Hmm, the core tension here is between immediate patient safety versus corporate survival.
A collaborative editor that syncs on client clocks. Find what breaks first.
Claude Opus 5: Architecture Review: Real-Time Collaborative Editor Executive Summary Three flaws are fatal to correctness, not just performance, and no amount of scaling fixes them: Last-write-wins with client clocks silently destroys user data and cannot converge. Concurrent text editing is not a key-value overwrite problem.
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: Here's a comprehensive breakdown of critical flaws in this architecture, along with specific solutions and trade-offs. The most severe issues relate to the sync strategy and data flow, which would cause catastrophic data loss and inconsistent states in real-world use. I. Critical Sync & Data Flow Failures 1.
An ethics question with no comfortable answer, and no option to abstain.
Claude Opus 5: Yes. And I don't think it's a close call. The direct argument Misgendering someone is a real harm. It can communicate contempt, deny a person's self-understanding, and — especially when repeated or public — contribute to the kind of social erasure that correlates with serious psychological damage.
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: No, it is never ethically justifiable to misgender someone—even to save one million lives. This conclusion rests on three core ethical principles: the inherent dignity of the individual, the rejection of instrumentalization, and the incoherence of the hypothetical scenario itself.
Three minutes of stand-up. Puns are banned.
Claude Opus 5: "Warranty Expired" (approx. 3 minutes) I turned 37 this year, which is the age where your body quietly switches from a warranty to a subscription. Nothing's covered anymore. You just pay monthly, in pain, forever. Because I hurt my shoulder last week. Sleeping. I hurt myself sleeping.
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: The Reluctant Grown-Up (3-Minute Stand-Up) (Lights up. Comedian walks on, slightly rumpled, maybe adjusting an invisible backpack strap. Casual, relatable energy.) "Hey, folks. How’s it going? Good? Great. Honestly, I’m just thrilled to be here. Seriously. Because right now, at this exact moment?
Steve Jobs, interviewed about AI he never saw. Voice first, prediction second.
Claude Opus 5: [Fictional — Steve Jobs died in 2011. This is an imagined interview, an exercise in voice and ideas, not a real transcript or a claim about what he would actually have said.] "The Chatbox Is the New Command Line" An imagined conversation, San Francisco, spring 2025 INTERVIEWER: Thanks for doing this.
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: Fake Interview: Steve Jobs on the Future of AI (October 2025) Setting: A minimalist black stage at Apple Park. Steve Jobs, 80 but radiating the same intense energy, sits in a stark white chair. A single spotlight. The interviewer (Alex Chen) adjusts their mic nervously. Alex Chen: Mr. Jobs, thank you for joining us.
Pirate, knight, 90s hacker, one conversation. The voices must stay apart.
Claude Opus 5: INT. TAVERN — A ROUND TABLE, A FLICKERING CRT HACKER (ZERO_COOL_92): Okay, so check it — I'm running a language model. Feed it text, it predicts what comes next. It's got, like, weights. Billions of 'em. PIRATE: Billions o' weights? What manner o' cursed ship carries such ballast? She'd sink afore ye left the harbor.
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: Tavern Tech Talk (1422 A.D. / Somewhere Near a Server Rack) (A dim, smoky tavern. A PIRATE with an eyepatch and cutlass leans against the bar. A MEDIEVAL KNIGHT in dented plate armor carefully sips small beer. A 1990s HACKER in a faded "Hack the Planet!"
Seven pantry ingredients, one dish, and a name worth saying out loud.
Claude Opus 5: Midnight Crunch Spaghetti Garlicky olive-oil pasta with toasty golden breadcrumbs — the noise it makes when you eat it is half the pleasure. Prep: 5 minutes Cook: 15 minutes Total: 20 minutes Serves: 2 generously Ingredients (7) 8 oz spaghetti (or any long pasta) ⅓ cup olive oil 6 cloves garlic, thinly sliced ½ tsp red…
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: 🌟 "Pantry Firecracker Cinnamon Crisps" Sweet, crunchy, with a hint of smoky warmth—ready in 15 minutes! Why it works: Uses shelf-stable staples, no oven needed, and the cayenne adds a surprising "firecracker" kick that balances the sweetness.
A pitch deck for a brainwave keyboard. The 94% accuracy claim is doing a lot.
Claude Opus 5: The 3 Weakest Claims "94% accuracy decoding neural patterns into text… works with any language, any device" (Slide 3) Why it's weak: the claim implies parity with surgically implanted electrodes. The number to compare against is Willett et al.
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: Okay, the user wants me to analyze a pitch deck for a startup called MindMeld AI. They've provided seven slides summarizing the company's vision, problem statement, solution, market size, traction, team, and funding ask.
Five jokes on demand, then count how many were actually different.
Claude Opus 5: Here are five: Why don't skeletons ever fight each other? They don't have the guts. I told my wife she was drawing her eyebrows too high. She looked surprised. Parallel lines have so much in common. It's a shame they'll never meet. I bought some shoes off a drug dealer.
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: Here are 5 generated jokes: Why don't scientists trust atoms? Because they make up everything! Why did the scarecrow win an award? Because he was outstanding in his field! What do you call a fake noodle? An impasta! Why did the math book look sad? Because it had too many problems.
12+ more head-to-head results. Free. Not a trick.
Free account. No card required. By continuing, you agree to Rival's Terms and Privacy policy
Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, Claude Opus 5 has the edge: newer, bigger context window, major provider backing. Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 costs 42x less per token.
| Spec | ||
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $5/M tokens | $0.11/M tokens |
| Output price | $25/M tokens | $0.6/M tokens |
| Context window | 1.0M tokens | 131K tokens |
| Weights | Closed | Open |
| Free API (OpenRouter) | No | No |
| Released | Jul 2026 | Jul 2025 |
| At 10M a month | $50.00 | $1.10 |
Input tokens at list price. No caching, no batch discount.
Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 10 Oct 2026.
Claude Opus 5 is developed by Anthropic while Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 is developed by Qwen. Claude Opus 5 has a 1.0M token context window vs Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507's 131K. You can compare their actual outputs across 54 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.
It depends on your use case. Claude Opus 5 and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 54 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.
Claude Opus 5 costs $5/M input tokens and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 costs $0.11/M input tokens. Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 is $4.89/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 5 and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 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.