The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601

LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 leads the LLM Stats Score 35.3 to 23.9. LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 is 11.4x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · Meituan · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 35.3 to 23.9, ranking #93 overall.

In the 3 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude 3.7 Sonnet wins 2; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 is roughly 11.4x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet also accepts a larger context window (200,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Claude 3.7 Sonnet

  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 3 exact shared results
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 200,000 token context window

Choose LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601

  • overall performance matters — it scores 35.3 and ranks #93 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • cost matters — it's about 11.4x cheaper per token
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Jan 2026
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Anthropic
LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601
Meituan
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
23.9
#177
35.3
#93
Reasoning
23.1
#173
35.5
#87
Coding
13.6
#144
18.8
#116
Agents
4.9
#156
9.6
#129
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
2 of 3
1 of 3
Input price
$3.00 / M
$0.30 / M
Output price
$15.00 / M
$1.20 / M
Context window
200,000
128,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

3 shared
Index
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601
Math
16.8#203
30.5#76
Tool use
17.9#75
24.1#36
Writing
18.8#25
30.1#2
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

11 reported for Claude 3.7 Sonnet · 11 for LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601

3 shared

Claude 3.7 Sonnet outperforms in 2 benchmarks (GPQA, SWE-Bench Verified), while LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 is better at 1 benchmark (AIME 2025).

Claude 3.7 Sonnet shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

Fri Oct 02 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 costs less

For input processing, Claude 3.7 Sonnet ($3.00/1M tokens) is 10.0x more expensive than LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 ($0.30/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude 3.7 Sonnet ($15.00/1M tokens) is 12.5x more expensive than LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 ($1.20/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude 3.7 Sonnet is more expensive than LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Fri Oct 02 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Input tokens$3.00
Output tokens$15.00
Best providerAnthropic
Meituan
LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601
Input tokens$0.30
Output tokens$1.20
Best providerMeituan
Notice missing or incorrect data?

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Claude 3.7 Sonnet accepts 200,000 input tokens compared to LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601's 128,000 tokens. Both models can generate responses up to 128,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude 3.7 Sonnet
Input200,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Meituan
LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Fri Oct 02 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude 3.7 Sonnet supports multimodal inputs, whereas LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 does not.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Text
Images
Audio
Video

LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude 3.7 Sonnet is licensed under a proprietary license, while LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 uses MIT.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Proprietary

Closed source

LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3.7 Sonnet was released on 2025-02-24, while LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 was released on 2026-01-14.

LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 is 11 months newer than Claude 3.7 Sonnet.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Feb 24, 2025

1.6 years ago

LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601

Jan 14, 2026

8 months ago

10mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

Claude 3.7 Sonnet is available from Anthropic, Bedrock, Google. LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 is available from Meituan.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M
bedrock logo
AWS Bedrock
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M
google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M

LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601

meituan logo
Meituan
Input Price:Input: $0.30/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.20/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude 3.7 Sonnet and LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet
✓ Preferred
LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601.

Which is better, Claude 3.7 Sonnet or LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601?

LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 leads the LLM Stats Score 35.3 to 23.9. Claude 3.7 Sonnet is made by Anthropic and LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 is made by Meituan. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude 3.7 Sonnet compare to LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 in benchmarks?

Claude 3.7 Sonnet scores MATH-500: 96.2%, IFEval: 93.2%, MMMLU: 86.1%, GPQA: 84.8%, TAU-bench Retail: 81.2%. LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 scores AIME 2025: 99.6%, Tau2 Telecom: 99.3%, Tau2 Retail: 88.6%, LiveCodeBench: 82.8%, GPQA: 80.5%.

Is Claude 3.7 Sonnet cheaper than LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601?

LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 is 10.0x cheaper for input tokens. Claude 3.7 Sonnet costs $3.00/M input and $15.00/M output via anthropic. LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 costs $0.30/M input and $1.20/M output via meituan.

What are the context window sizes for Claude 3.7 Sonnet and LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601?

Claude 3.7 Sonnet supports 200K tokens and LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 supports 128K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude 3.7 Sonnet and LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (23.9 vs 35.3), context window (200K vs 128K), input pricing ($3.00 vs $0.30/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude 3.7 Sonnet and LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601?

Claude 3.7 Sonnet is developed by Anthropic and LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 is developed by Meituan.

Related comparisons