Claude Sonnet 5 vs Qwen3.7 Plus
什么时候选哪个
两者共享 1000000 token 上下文窗口,都接受文本和图像并输出文本,所以差别主要在价格和形态:claude-sonnet-5 每百万输入 $2、输出 $10,对比 qwen3.7-plus 的 $0.4 和 $1.6,即 Anthropic 这款输入是 5 倍、输出是 6.25 倍费率(缓存读取 2.5 倍,$0.2 对 $0.08)。需要它明确的思考能力,或单次回复最多 128000 输出 token 时选 claude-sonnet-5;大批量长上下文工作,或输入包含视频(它接受而 claude-sonnet-5 不接受)时选 qwen3.7-plus。
Benchmark 成绩
供应商公布: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic ByteDance DeepSeek Google MiniMax Moonshot OpenAI Tencent Z.ai
价格
| Claude Sonnet 5 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Δ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 输入 / 1M token | $2 | $0.4 | 5× |
| 输出 / 1M token | $10 | $1.6 | 6.3× |
| 缓存读取 / 1M token | $0.2 | $0.08 | 2.5× |
| 缓存写入 | 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) | 1.25x | - |
价格取自构建时的实时目录,最新价格见各模型页面。
两个模型所处的位置:全部 76 个按同一单位计费的聊天模型的每 1M token 输入价分布(对数刻度)
能力
| Claude Sonnet 5 | Qwen3.7 Plus | |
|---|---|---|
| 工具调用 | 是 | 是 |
| 思考控制 | 可配置 | 可配置 |
| 结构化输出 | 是 | 是 |
| 提示词缓存 | 显式(由你标记前缀) | 隐式 + 显式 |
| 缓存有效期 | 5m default, 1h option | explicit: 5m, reset on hit |
| 最小缓存前缀 | 1024 个 token | 1024 个 token |
规格
| Claude Sonnet 5 | Qwen3.7 Plus | |
|---|---|---|
| 输入模态 | 文本 图像 | 文本 图像 视频 |
| 输出模态 | 文本 | 文本 |
| 发布日期 | 2026-06-30 | 2026-06-01 |
| 知识截止日期 | 2026-01 | - |
| 上下文窗口 | 1M | 1M |
| 最大输出 | 128K | 66K |
| 思考参数 |
|
|
| 可选值 | thinking.type
effort
"enabled" returns 400 | enable_thinking
thinking_budget
preserve_thinking
|
| 默认值 | thinking on (adaptive) effort
| on the Qwen3.7 Plus series is hybrid thinking with thinking enabled by default, and preserve_thinking is off |
规格照录自各供应商的文档;供应商没有公布的项目,对应的行直接省略,不做推断。 完整来源: Claude Sonnet 5 · Qwen3.7 Plus
同一条提示词,两个模型,经网关实测
Claude Sonnet 5 通过 · 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.
输出 194 tok 延迟 4.3 s
Qwen3.7 Plus 通过 · 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.
输出 1428 tok (+1345 思考) 延迟 25.2 s
指令遵循(恰好三句,数得出来)、受众适配(对 CFO 说话的口吻),以及下方 token 计数暴露出的隐藏思考计费差额。
Claude Sonnet 5 通过 · 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. […]
输出 536 tok 延迟 7.1 s
Qwen3.7 Plus 通过 · 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. […]
输出 2317 tok (+2005 思考) 延迟 40.5 s
修复是否真的正确(能运行)、解释的信息密度,以及在一个范围明确的任务上的 token 效率。
Claude Sonnet 5 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance null
```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "Q3", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11.5, "guidance": null } ```
输出 348 tok 延迟 5.3 s
Qwen3.7 Plus 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance null
{ "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null }
输出 1807 tok (+1750 思考) 延迟 31.6 s
是否严守 schema(不臆造字段)、能否顶住幻觉压力(原文明说暂不给出 guidance),以及结构化输出路径的差异。
Claude Sonnet 5 通过 · 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.
输出 259 tok 延迟 4.8 s
Qwen3.7 Plus 通过 · 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.
输出 4453 tok (+4312 思考) 延迟 76.8 s
是否守住约束(字数预算、禁用词表、只能有一个问句)、文风特征,以及长度控制。
改一行代码就能在两个模型之间切换
下方每个标签页里都有两个模型 ID,高亮的那两行是唯一要改的地方。端点不变,API key 不变,请求结构也不变。
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", # 取消注释此行,注释上一行
messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)import OpenAI from "openai";
const client = new OpenAI({
baseURL: "https://synthorai.io/v1",
apiKey: "sk-syn-...",
});
const resp = await client.chat.completions.create({
model: "claude-sonnet-5",
// model: "qwen3.7-plus", // 取消注释此行,注释上一行
messages: [{ role: "user", content: "Summarize this diff" }],
reasoning_effort: "medium",
});
console.log(resp.choices[0].message.content);curl https://synthorai.io/v1/chat/completions \
-H "Authorization: Bearer sk-syn-..." \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
"model": "claude-sonnet-5",
# "model": "qwen3.7-plus", # 取消注释此行,注释上一行
"messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "Hello"}],
"reasoning_effort": "medium"
}'package main
import (
"context"
"fmt"
"github.com/openai/openai-go/v3"
"github.com/openai/openai-go/v3/option"
)
func main() {
client := openai.NewClient(
option.WithBaseURL("https://synthorai.io/v1"),
option.WithAPIKey("sk-syn-..."),
)
resp, _ := client.Chat.Completions.New(context.TODO(), openai.ChatCompletionNewParams{
Model: "claude-sonnet-5",
// Model: "qwen3.7-plus", // 取消注释此行,注释上一行
Messages: []openai.ChatCompletionMessageParamUnion{
openai.UserMessage("Summarize this diff"),
},
ReasoningEffort: openai.ReasoningEffortMedium,
})
fmt.Println(resp.Choices[0].Message.Content)
}import com.openai.client.OpenAIClient;
import com.openai.client.okhttp.OpenAIOkHttpClient;
import com.openai.models.chat.completions.*;
import com.openai.models.ReasoningEffort;
OpenAIClient client = OpenAIOkHttpClient.builder()
.baseUrl("https://synthorai.io/v1")
.apiKey("sk-syn-...")
.build();
ChatCompletion resp = client.chat().completions().create(
ChatCompletionCreateParams.builder()
.model("claude-sonnet-5")
// .model("qwen3.7-plus") // 取消注释此行,注释上一行
.addUserMessage("Summarize this diff")
.reasoningEffort(ReasoningEffort.MEDIUM)
.build());
System.out.println(resp.choices().get(0).message().content().orElse(""));常见问题
Claude Sonnet 5 和 Qwen3.7 Plus 哪个更便宜?
按「输入 / 1M token」算,Qwen3.7 Plus 更便宜($0.4 对 $2,相差 5.0×)。其他计费项的结论可能相反,完整价格见上方表格,实际成本取决于你的用量构成。
不用分别集成两次,就能对 Claude Sonnet 5 和 Qwen3.7 Plus 做 A/B 测试吗?
可以。两个模型走同一个 OpenAI 兼容端点,用同一个 API key,切换时只要改一行里的模型名,所以可以给两个模型各分一部分流量,直接对比账单。
Claude Sonnet 5 和 Qwen3.7 Plus 支持提示词缓存吗?
支持。两个模型的缓存读取价都低于各自的输入价,所以前缀能反复命中缓存的负载,实际成本会比按官网价估算的低。具体的缓存读取价见上方价格表。