🎁 新用戶 免費註冊,送 10 次呼叫,最高 $1,免綁卡。

Claude Sonnet 5 vs Qwen3.7 Plus

vs

何時該用哪一個 — 綜合評斷,而非基準測試數據表

兩者共享 1000000 token 脈絡視窗,都接受文字和影像並輸出文字,所以差別主要在價格和形態:claude-sonnet-5 每百萬輸入 $2、輸出 $10,對比 qwen3.7-plus 的 $0.4 和 $1.6,即 Anthropic 這款輸入是 5 倍、輸出是 6.25 倍費率(快取讀取 2.5 倍,$0.2 對 $0.08)。需要它明確的思考能力,或單次回覆最多 128000 輸出 token 時選 claude-sonnet-5;大批量長脈絡工作,或輸入包含視訊(它接受而 claude-sonnet-5 不接受)時選 qwen3.7-plus。

定價

Claude Sonnet 5 Qwen3.7 Plus Δ
輸入 / 1M tokens $2 $0.4
輸出 / 1M tokens $10 $1.6 6.3×
快取讀取 / 1M tokens $0.2 $0.08 2.5×
快取寫入 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) 1.25x

費率取自建置時的即時目錄;各模型頁面皆附有目前的費率卡。

它們的相對位置 — 在此計費單位下,所有 63 個 聊天 模型的 每 1M tokens 的輸入價格(對數尺度)

$0.05 · Qwen3 VL Flash $30 · GPT-5.4 Pro

能力

Claude Sonnet 5 Qwen3.7 Plus
工具使用
思考控制 可配置 可配置
結構化輸出
提示快取 顯式(由您標記前綴) 隱式 + 顯式
快取生命週期 5m default, 1h option explicit: 5m, reset on hit
最小快取前綴 1024 個 token 1024 個 token

規格

Claude Sonnet 5 Qwen3.7 Plus
輸入模態 文字 影像 文字 影像 影片
輸出模態 文字 文字
發布日期 2026-06-30 2026-06-01
知識截止日期 2026-01
上下文視窗 1M 1M
最大輸出 128K 66K
思考參數
  • thinking.type "adaptive"
  • output_config.effort
  • enable_thinking
  • thinking_budget
  • preserve_thinking
可接受的值
thinking.type
  • adaptive
  • disabled
effort
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max

"enabled" returns 400

enable_thinking
  • true
  • false
thinking_budget
  • in tokens
preserve_thinking
  • true
  • false
預設值

thinking on (adaptive)

effort
  • high

on

the Qwen3.7 Plus series is hybrid thinking with thinking enabled by default, and preserve_thinking is off

規格摘錄自各供應商的文件;供應商未發布的資料列會直接省略,而非自行推測。 完整來源: Claude Sonnet 5 · Qwen3.7 Plus

單一提示詞,兩款模型 — 經由閘道測量

提示詞 Explain to a CFO, in exactly three sentences, why our LLM bill doubled after we enabled reasoning. 檢查 恰好 3 句

Claude Sonnet 5 通過 · 3 sentences

Reasoning mode works by having the model generate extended internal "thinking" steps before producing its final answer, and since we're billed on total tokens, that hidden reasoning text adds significantly to what we pay for—even though you never see it in the output. This is different from simply getting longer visible responses; the model is essentially "showing its work" behind the scenes, and complex prompts can trigger thousands of extra reasoning tokens per request. The upside is improved accuracy on complex tasks, but if we want to control costs, we should selectively enable reasoning only for queries that truly need it, rather than applying it universally.

輸出 194 tok 延遲 4.3 s

Qwen3.7 Plus 通過 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning requires the model to generate extensive internal "thinking" tokens to process complex logic before delivering a final answer. Because our vendor charges us per token consumed, this hidden computational overhead effectively doubles our output volume for the exact same number of user requests. Consequently, our costs have doubled because we are now paying for the model's increased processing time to achieve higher-quality, more accurate results.

輸出 1428 tok (+1345 思考) 延遲 25.2 s

指令遵循(恰好三句,可數)、受眾適配(面向 CFO 的語氣),以及下方 token 計量所暴露的隱藏思考計費缺口。

提示詞 This function is supposed to return the longest run of consecutive equal items, but callers report it is off by one on single-element inputs and misses runs that end at the last index. Fix it and explain the bug in one paragraph. 檢查 修復通過測試

Claude Sonnet 5 通過 · 8/8 cases

## The Bug The function has two related off-by-one issues rooted in the same cause: `cur` and `best` are initialized to `0` instead of `1`, treating run lengths as the number of *matches* between adjacent elements rather than the number of *elements* in the run. This means a single-element input never enters the loop (since `range(1, 1)` is empty) and returns `0` instead of the correct answer of `1`. It also means that for any input, the run length is undercounted by exactly one — a run of 3 equal elements only produces 2 "match" increments, so `best` ends up as 2 instead of 3. The claim that it "misses runs that end at the last index" is actually a symptom of this same undercount: the logic does update `best` correctly on every iteration (including the last), but because it's counting matches instead of elements, the final reported value is always one less than the true longest run. […]

輸出 536 tok 延遲 7.1 s

Qwen3.7 Plus 通過 · 8/8 cases

## Fixed Code ```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` ## Bug Explanation The function has two related bugs rooted in how it counts run lengths. First, `cur` is initialized to `0` and only incremented on matches, so it counts the number of *transitions* between equal elements rather than the total elements in the run—a run of N identical items only reaches `cur = N − 1`, undercounting by one. This also causes the single-element case to return `0`, since the loop never executes and `cur` never increments. […]

輸出 2317 tok (+2005 思考) 延遲 40.5 s

修復是否真的正確(可執行)、解釋的資訊密度,以及在一個邊界明確的任務上的 token 效率。

提示詞 Extract a JSON object with fields {company, quarter, revenue_usd_m, growth_pct, guidance} from this text. Use null for anything not stated; add no other fields. 檢查 合法 JSON,schema 精確

Claude Sonnet 5 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance null

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "Q3", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11.5, "guidance": null } ```

輸出 348 tok 延遲 5.3 s

Qwen3.7 Plus 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance null

{ "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null }

輸出 1807 tok (+1750 思考) 延遲 31.6 s

schema 服從度(不臆造欄位)、幻覺壓力(guidance 明確被暫緩給出),以及結構化輸出路徑的差異。

提示詞 Write a 120-word product announcement for an API gateway feature that caches prompts across providers. Forbidden words: "seamless", "unlock", "game-changer", "revolutionize", "empower". Exactly one sentence must be a question. 檢查 120 詞,0 個禁用詞

Claude Sonnet 5 通過 · 123 words, 0 banned, 1 question

## Introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Caching We're rolling out a new caching layer for our API gateway that works across every major LLM provider you connect through it. Instead of resending identical prompts and paying full price each time, the gateway recognizes repeated requests and serves cached responses in milliseconds—regardless of whether you're routing to OpenAI, Anthropic, or Google. What does this mean for your bill and your latency? Both drop, often significantly, especially for teams running high-volume, repetitive workloads like customer support bots or batch content generation. The cache is configurable per route, with adjustable TTLs and invalidation rules, so you stay in control of freshness versus cost. Available now for all Pro and Enterprise plans. Check your dashboard to enable it today.

輸出 259 tok 延遲 4.8 s

Qwen3.7 Plus 通過 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Introducing PromptCache, our new API gateway feature designed to store and reuse prompts across multiple artificial intelligence providers. Have you ever noticed how repeatedly sending identical queries drains your budget and increases latency? PromptCache solves this by intelligently storing responses at the gateway level. When your application requests the same prompt from a different provider, the system instantly returns the cached result. This drastically reduces API costs and accelerates response times for your users. You can configure custom expiration times and set specific fallback rules for each vendor. You must stop paying twice for the exact same computation. Please upgrade your entire infrastructure today and experience much faster and cheaper integrations without changing a single line of your application code.

輸出 4453 tok (+4312 思考) 延遲 76.8 s

約束服從度(字數預算、禁用詞表、唯一的那句問句)、文風指紋,以及長度控制。

只需一行程式碼即可在兩者間切換

以下每個頁籤中都有這兩個 ID — 醒目提示的這兩行是唯一的修改處。相同的端點,相同的金鑰,相同的請求結構。

from openai import OpenAI

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
    api_key="sk-syn-...",
)

resp = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="claude-sonnet-5",
    # model="qwen3.7-plus",  # 取消註解此行,並註解上一行
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
    reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

取得 API 金鑰 →

常見問題

Claude Sonnet 5 和 Qwen3.7 Plus 哪個比較便宜?

Qwen3.7 Plus 在 輸入 / 1m tokens 上較便宜($0.4 對比 $2,相差 5.0×)。其他項目可能呈現相反結果 — 上表提供完整資訊,實際成本取決於您的使用組合。

我可以在不進行兩次整合的情況下,對 Claude Sonnet 5 和 Qwen3.7 Plus 進行 A/B 測試嗎?

可以。兩者皆透過同一個相容 OpenAI 的端點提供服務,並使用同一把 API 金鑰 — 切換只需更改一行的模型字串,因此您可以將部分流量分別導向兩者並直接比較帳單。

Claude Sonnet 5 與 Qwen3.7 Plus 支援提示快取嗎?

是的 — 兩者的快取讀取費率皆低於其輸入費率,因此具有暖前綴的工作負載成本會低於牌價所示。確切的快取讀取列請見上方的定價表。

相關比較