Identity mismatchSubstitution detected
Does not match the claimed model claude-opus-4-7
行为特征与官方 claude-opus-4-7 不符，最接近官方 minimax-m3.1-flash。
Brand consistency0/100
Model match score (claude-opus-4-7)0/100
Checks10/17 Passed
- Providers
- Transform Platform
- Claimed model
- claude-opus-4-7
- Plan
- Full check
- Reference
- 108 official models
- Requests
- 15
- Duration
- 4 分钟
01Identity check
Behaviour compared with each official referenceIndependent sample A采样 AValidIndependent sample B采样 BInvalidIndependent sample C采样 CValidReference108 official models · 2/3 Valid
Answer by answer2 answers: 0 match claude-opus-4-7；another 1 look more like minimax-m3.1-flash；another 1 match no model clearly on their own
Similarity to official modelsTop 5
- minimax-m3.1-flash99%
- gpt-5.6-terra<1%
- claude-opus-5-5<1%
- gpt-5.6-sol<1%
- gpt-6.1-sol<1%
02Test details
17 items · 10 passed · 4 notes · 3 failed| No. | Check | Result | Methodology |
|---|---|---|---|
| Connectivity & auth | |||
| A-01 | Endpoint reachable | Passed | The endpoint responds normally |
| A-02 | Key authentication | Passed | API key is valid and allowed to make calls |
| A-03 | Model on sale | Passed | The model list includes claude-opus-4-7 |
| API conformance | |||
| B-01 | Basic call | Passed | Returns the expected content as instructed |
| B-02 | Response structure | Meets the spec | All OpenAI-compatible fields are present |
| B-03 | Model ID echoed back | Match | The model ID in the response matches the request |
| B-04 | Usage record | Complete and consistent | Input, output and total are all present, and the total equals the sum |
| B-05 | Output cleanliness | Nothing added | No inserted ads, watermarks or extra notes found |
| Identity check | |||
| C-01 | Independent sampling | 2 / 3 valid | Some samples could not be used for comparison |
| C-02 | Brand consistency | Mismatch | Behavior does not belong to the Anthropic Claude family; brand match score 0 |
| C-03 | Model consistency | Mismatch | Model match score 0; closest to the official minimax-m3.1-flash |
| C-04 | Cross-brand swap check | Substitution detected | Behavior is closest to minimax-m3.1-flash from another brand |
| Billing & capabilities | |||
| D-01 | Cache billing | Partly works | On average 75% of repeated requests were billed at the cache price; the rest at the regular price. |
| D-02 | Context length | 32K passed | Read in full up to 32K; 128K failed: 接口返回 HTTP 400. |
| D-03 | Streaming output | Normal | Streamed content is complete |
| D-04 | Tool use | Supported | Returns the correct function name and arguments |
| D-05 | Structured output | Did not follow the schema | The response did not follow the required JSON schema |
03Which apps can connect
Tried once per app with claude-opus-4-7, the way each app connectsUsing this test’s address, key and model, we test responses and tool calls in each app’s API format. We do not launch the apps or test installation, sign-in or complete tasks.
| Software | Result | Methodology |
|---|---|---|
| Claude Code | Connects | Replied normally and called the toolConnected the way Claude Code does (Anthropic format) |
| Codex | Didn't connect | This API rejected the key. Copy a valid key again and check its permission for this model（HTTP 403）Connected the way Codex does (OpenAI Responses format) |
| Cherry Studio, Chatbox, LobeChat, Open WebUI, Cline | Connects | Replied normally and called the toolConnected the way Cherry Studio and similar apps do (OpenAI-compatible format) |
Cache billing check
The same long content was sent 5 times: the 1st is billed at the regular price, and from the 2nd on the repeated part should be billed at the cache price.
Cache billing ratio74.6%
Partly works
On average 75% of repeated requests were billed at the cache price; the rest at the regular price.
Usage this run30.7KCached tokens19.4KNon-cached tokens11.2KAverage per run6.1K
Usage reportedReportedCache billingHappenedResultPartly works
Cache share by testThis is only the cache share the endpoint reported; the real discount is on the bill
Context length check
Long documents are sent tier by tier to check whether the whole document is read.
Verified up to 32K
Read in full up to 32K; 128K failed: 接口返回 HTTP 400.
Reference windowVerified up to 32KThe model center has no reference context window for this model yet.Tested context lengths32K / 128KTested from short to long, stopping at the first failure.
- 32KRead in full · 26.5K received
- 128K接口返回 HTTP 400
Token usage check
Reported usage is used; estimates appear only when none is reported.
Reported usage69.4KThe actual usage reported by the API; this page goes by it.Estimated usage1.3M-1.8MEstimated from this test's requests.Deviation95% belowThe reported usage is below the estimate, possibly because of how tokens are counted or compressed.Usage checkBelow the estimateFigures are as reported by the API; your bill is authoritative.
Method: independent samples from the tested endpoint are compared against reference samples collected from official channels; billing, context and capability items come from real calls. API keys, request bodies and raw model output are not stored.
This report reflects the endpoint at the time of testing.
Reviews
还没有人评论，来写第一条。
Before you buy AI, check MozhenzhenScan to view reportOpen full report
Mozhenzhen verification report · Measured with real calls
claude-opus-4-7 verification report
Identity mismatchSubstitution detected
Does not match the claimed model claude-opus-4-7
行为特征与官方 claude-opus-4-7 不符，最接近官方 minimax-m3.1-flash。
Brand consistency0/100
Model match score (claude-opus-4-7)0/100
Checks10/17 Passed
- Providers
- Transform Platform
- Claimed model
- claude-opus-4-7
- Plan
- Full check
- Reference
- 108 official models
- Requests
- 15
- Duration
- 4 分钟
01Identity check
Behaviour compared with each official referenceIndependent sample A采样 AValidIndependent sample B采样 BInvalidIndependent sample C采样 CValidReference108 official models · 2/3 Valid
Answer by answer2 answers: 0 match claude-opus-4-7；another 1 look more like minimax-m3.1-flash；another 1 match no model clearly on their own
Similarity to official modelsTop 5
- minimax-m3.1-flash99%
- gpt-5.6-terra<1%
- claude-opus-5-5<1%
- gpt-5.6-sol<1%
- gpt-6.1-sol<1%
02Test details
17 items · 10 passed · 4 notes · 3 failed| No. | Check | Result | Methodology |
|---|---|---|---|
| Connectivity & auth | |||
| A-01 | Endpoint reachable | Passed | The endpoint responds normally |
| A-02 | Key authentication | Passed | API key is valid and allowed to make calls |
| A-03 | Model on sale | Passed | The model list includes claude-opus-4-7 |
| API conformance | |||
| B-01 | Basic call | Passed | Returns the expected content as instructed |
| B-02 | Response structure | Meets the spec | All OpenAI-compatible fields are present |
| B-03 | Model ID echoed back | Match | The model ID in the response matches the request |
| B-04 | Usage record | Complete and consistent | Input, output and total are all present, and the total equals the sum |
| B-05 | Output cleanliness | Nothing added | No inserted ads, watermarks or extra notes found |
| Identity check | |||
| C-01 | Independent sampling | 2 / 3 valid | Some samples could not be used for comparison |
| C-02 | Brand consistency | Mismatch | Behavior does not belong to the Anthropic Claude family; brand match score 0 |
| C-03 | Model consistency | Mismatch | Model match score 0; closest to the official minimax-m3.1-flash |
| C-04 | Cross-brand swap check | Substitution detected | Behavior is closest to minimax-m3.1-flash from another brand |
| Billing & capabilities | |||
| D-01 | Cache billing | Partly works | On average 75% of repeated requests were billed at the cache price; the rest at the regular price. |
| D-02 | Context length | 32K passed | Read in full up to 32K; 128K failed: 接口返回 HTTP 400. |
| D-03 | Streaming output | Normal | Streamed content is complete |
| D-04 | Tool use | Supported | Returns the correct function name and arguments |
| D-05 | Structured output | Did not follow the schema | The response did not follow the required JSON schema |
03Which apps can connect
Tried once per app with claude-opus-4-7, the way each app connectsUsing this test’s address, key and model, we test responses and tool calls in each app’s API format. We do not launch the apps or test installation, sign-in or complete tasks.
| Software | Result | Methodology |
|---|---|---|
| Claude Code | Connects | Replied normally and called the toolConnected the way Claude Code does (Anthropic format) |
| Codex | Didn't connect | This API rejected the key. Copy a valid key again and check its permission for this model（HTTP 403）Connected the way Codex does (OpenAI Responses format) |
| Cherry Studio, Chatbox, LobeChat, Open WebUI, Cline | Connects | Replied normally and called the toolConnected the way Cherry Studio and similar apps do (OpenAI-compatible format) |
Cache billing check
The same long content was sent 5 times: the 1st is billed at the regular price, and from the 2nd on the repeated part should be billed at the cache price.
Cache billing ratio74.6%
Partly works
On average 75% of repeated requests were billed at the cache price; the rest at the regular price.
Usage this run30.7KCached tokens19.4KNon-cached tokens11.2KAverage per run6.1K
Usage reportedReportedCache billingHappenedResultPartly works
Cache share by testThis is only the cache share the endpoint reported; the real discount is on the bill
Context length check
Long documents are sent tier by tier to check whether the whole document is read.
Verified up to 32K
Read in full up to 32K; 128K failed: 接口返回 HTTP 400.
Reference windowVerified up to 32KThe model center has no reference context window for this model yet.Tested context lengths32K / 128KTested from short to long, stopping at the first failure.
- 32KRead in full · 26.5K received
- 128K接口返回 HTTP 400
Token usage check
Reported usage is used; estimates appear only when none is reported.
Reported usage69.4KThe actual usage reported by the API; this page goes by it.Estimated usage1.3M-1.8MEstimated from this test's requests.Deviation95% belowThe reported usage is below the estimate, possibly because of how tokens are counted or compressed.Usage checkBelow the estimateFigures are as reported by the API; your bill is authoritative.
Method: independent samples from the tested endpoint are compared against reference samples collected from official channels; billing, context and capability items come from real calls. API keys, request bodies and raw model output are not stored.
This report reflects the endpoint at the time of testing.
Reviews
还没有人评论，来写第一条。
发表评论
编辑器加载中…
发表评论