Model Comparison

Claude Sonnet 4 vs Qwen2.5-Omni-7B

Claude Sonnet 4 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

2 benchmarks

Claude Sonnet 4 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (GPQA, MMMU), while Qwen2.5-Omni-7B is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Sonnet 4 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Fri May 01 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Cost data unavailable.

Lowest available price from all providers
Fri May 01 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4
Input tokens$3.00
Output tokens$15.00
Best providerAnthropic
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2.5-Omni-7B
Input tokens$0.00
Output tokens$0.00
Best providerUnknown Organization
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude Sonnet 4 specifies input context (200,000 tokens). Only Claude Sonnet 4 specifies output context (64,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4
Input200,000 tokens
Output64,000 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2.5-Omni-7B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Fri May 01 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both Claude Sonnet 4 and Qwen2.5-Omni-7B support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Claude Sonnet 4

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen2.5-Omni-7B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Sonnet 4 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen2.5-Omni-7B uses Apache 2.0.

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

Claude Sonnet 4

Proprietary

Closed source

Qwen2.5-Omni-7B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Sonnet 4 was released on 2025-05-22, while Qwen2.5-Omni-7B was released on 2025-03-27.

Claude Sonnet 4 is 2 months newer than Qwen2.5-Omni-7B.

Claude Sonnet 4

May 22, 2025

11 months ago

1mo newer
Qwen2.5-Omni-7B

Mar 27, 2025

1.1 years ago

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

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Larger context window (200,000 tokens)
Higher GPQA score (75.4% vs 30.8%)
Higher MMMU score (74.4% vs 59.2%)
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Qwen2.5-Omni-7B

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Has open weights
AnthropicClaude Sonnet 4
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen TeamQwen2.5-Omni-7B
Compare in Playground

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2.5-Omni-7B

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Sonnet 4 vs Qwen2.5-Omni-7B

Claude Sonnet 4 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude Sonnet 4 is made by Anthropic and Qwen2.5-Omni-7B is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Claude Sonnet 4 scores MMMLU: 86.5%, TAU-bench Retail: 80.5%, GPQA: 75.4%, MMMU: 74.4%, SWE-Bench Verified: 72.7%. Qwen2.5-Omni-7B scores DocVQA: 95.2%, VocalSound: 93.9%, GSM8k: 88.7%, GiantSteps Tempo: 88.0%, ChartQA: 85.3%.
Claude Sonnet 4 supports 200K tokens and Qwen2.5-Omni-7B supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Claude Sonnet 4 is developed by Anthropic and Qwen2.5-Omni-7B is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.