Head-to-head comparison across 5benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)
90
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
65
Verified leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) #5 · Qwen3.5-122B-A10B #8
Pick Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.5-122B-A10B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Agentic
+18.8 difference
Coding
+0.9 difference
Reasoning
+15.6 difference
Knowledge
+13.4 difference
Multimodal
+12.9 difference
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
$5 / $25
$0 / $0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1M
262K
Pick Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.5-122B-A10B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 90 to 65. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive)'s sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 74.9 against 56.1. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 69.4% to 49.4%. Qwen3.5-122B-A10B does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) is also the more expensive model on tokens at $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Qwen3.5-122B-A10B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 262K for Qwen3.5-122B-A10B.
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 90 to 65. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 69.4% and 49.4%.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.6 versus 68.2. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 72.9 versus 72. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 75.8 versus 60.2. Qwen3.5-122B-A10B stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive) has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 74.9 versus 56.1. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 77.2 versus 64.3. Inside this category, CharXiv is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.