How to Choose Between GPT 5.5, Claude Opus 4.7, DeepSeek V4, and Qwen 3.6 Max

Tue, 28 Apr 2026 22:18:00 +0800

If you only want the short answer, remember this version first:

If you want the most reliable option and the least wasted time, start with GPT 5.5
If you care most about page presentation, creativity, and visual polish, Claude Opus 4.7 is still strong
If you want to know which domestic model is closest to the top tier, Qwen 3.6 Max is highly competitive now
DeepSeek V4 is not weak, but its output is more uneven than the others

When people ask which coding AI is the strongest right now, they are usually not really asking about a leaderboard. They are asking something more practical:
If I need to build a page, make a demo, generate a small tool, or add interaction, which model is most likely to give me something usable on the first try?

From that angle, the differences between these models are already pretty clear.

The Overall Verdict

If you put GPT 5.5, Claude Opus 4.7, DeepSeek V4, and Qwen 3.6 Max side by side, the most consistent all-around choice is still GPT 5.5.

It is not always the flashiest one, but it rarely leaves you clearly disappointed. It is fast, the first draft usually comes out with high completion, and it handles logic, interaction, motion, and small games with a steady hand.

Claude Opus 4.7 feels different. Its biggest strength is not pure stability. It is page atmosphere, UI organization, and presentation. A lot of the time, you open what it made and your first reaction is simply that it looks polished. If visual presentation matters more to you, it is still very worth considering.

Qwen 3.6 Max is the one that most deserves a fresh look. It is no longer just “usable for a domestic model.” In some scenarios, it can genuinely go head-to-head with GPT 5.5 on output quality. In frontend pages, visual completeness, and realism, it has started to build real presence.

DeepSeek V4 is not failing because it cannot do the work. The issue is that it is less predictable. When it works, it can be perfectly solid, and sometimes surprisingly good. But the gap between its better and weaker outputs is still more obvious than it is with the others.

Where `GPT 5.5` Is Strongest

If the things you do most often look like this:

Generate a complete webpage
Build a small demo with motion
Create an interactive page with some logic
Generate a small game or a multi-state interaction
Keep rework to a minimum

Then GPT 5.5 is still the safest default answer.

Its advantages are mostly these:

Fast code generation
High first-draft usability
Fewer hard mistakes in logic and interaction
Stable performance on mixed tasks

To put it more simply, GPT 5.5 feels like the model most likely to get the foundation right on the first pass.
What many people actually need is not the most dazzling result in one category. They need the first version not to break. On that front, it is still the least stressful choice.

Of course, it is not without weaknesses.

On highly visual pages, it is not always the most surprising
Sometimes it is so stable that it leaves less of a design impression

So if you want one default recommendation, it is still GPT 5.5.
That does not mean it is the only one worth looking at.

Who `Claude Opus 4.7` Fits Best

The appeal of Claude Opus 4.7 comes more from how the page feels.

Its strengths are usually:

Cleaner UI structure
More complete visual presentation
Stronger presentation quality on some pages
More noticeable creativity in visualization and design

If the model is helping you build things like:

Demo pages
Data presentation pages
Small pages where visual feel matters a lot
Outputs that should look polished immediately

Then Claude still deserves a place near the top.

Its weaknesses are also fairly clear:

It is not as stable as GPT 5.5
Sometimes it looks good, but the detailed logic drifts
In some cases the code runs, yet the core experience is not quite right

So Claude feels more like a frontend-leaning model with extra aesthetic instinct.
If your first priority is how the page looks, it has real advantages. If your biggest fear is a logic mistake in the first output, you need to be a bit more careful.

Why `Qwen 3.6 Max` Deserves Serious Attention

Among these models, Qwen 3.6 Max gives the strongest sense of momentum.

Not long ago, many people looked at domestic coding AI mainly by asking whether it could keep up at all. With Qwen 3.6 Max, the question is already different:
In frontend-first output scenarios, can it directly compete with the top overseas models?

Its strongest areas right now include:

Good-looking page output
Solid motion and realistic visual effects in some cases
Outputs that feel more complete
Results that can sometimes approach or stay close to GPT 5.5

That says something important.
If your use case leans toward webpages, frontend work, and presentation-heavy output, Qwen 3.6 Max is no longer just a backup option. It can be treated as a serious main candidate.

It still has some weaknesses, though.

On interaction-heavy logic tasks, it can still lose a bit of completeness
Some pages look very good, while some tasks fall flatter than expected
Its variance is still higher than GPT 5.5

Even so, its current presence is already very strong.
If you want to know which domestic model deserves the most attention right now, it is hard to look past Qwen 3.6 Max.

Where `DeepSeek V4` Stands Right Now

DeepSeek V4 is a little more complicated to place.

The issue is not that it cannot do the work. The issue is that it is harder to predict where a given result will land.
Sometimes it can finish the task with decent visuals and working functionality. Sometimes, once the task asks for animation, logic, and data presentation at the same time, it becomes more likely to stumble.

Right now it feels more like this:

It has real ability
It is not weak
It can still hand in acceptable results on some tasks
But its stability is not yet reassuring enough

That shapes who it suits best.

If you do not mind trying a few times, can tolerate an occasional restart, or already plan to check and edit the code yourself, DeepSeek V4 is still worth using.
But if your top priority is reducing friction and maximizing first-pass success, it is not yet the safest option.

So What Should an Ordinary User Pick?

If you are not benchmarking models for fun and actually want to get work done, the easiest way is to choose by use case.

1. You want less hassle and a higher first-pass success rate

Pick GPT 5.5.

It is best at this workflow: “Here is my requirement, give me a usable first version.”
That matters even more when you do not have the time to keep iterating and fixing.

2. You care more about presentation and visual finish

Pick Claude Opus 4.7.

If what you want is a page that already looks more like a finished product, or your work is more demo-oriented and presentation-oriented, Claude shows its value more easily.

3. You want the strongest domestic model for frontend-first output

Start with Qwen 3.6 Max.

It is no longer something you use only as a compromise. It can now be compared directly and seriously.
If your tasks lean toward webpages, motion, and presentation, its competitiveness is already very real.

4. You can tolerate some variance and want to keep watching domestic progress

Keep an eye on DeepSeek V4.

Its problem is not lack of ability. It is that the level of execution still varies too much.
If the stability keeps improving, it could become much more important.

One Last Line

The difference between these mainstream coding AIs is no longer about who can code and who cannot. It is about who is steadier, who looks better, and who fits your kind of work.

If you want the simplest answer, GPT 5.5 is still the first choice.
If you want stronger presentation quality, Claude Opus 4.7 still has real flavor.
If you care about which domestic model deserves the closest attention, Qwen 3.6 Max is already near the front.
DeepSeek V4 feels more like a strong contender that is still working on consistency.

If you want the shortest possible conclusion:

For stability, pick GPT 5.5. For presentation, pick Claude. Among domestic models, the one most worth watching is Qwen 3.6 Max.

Qwen 3.6 Max on KnightLi Blog