Model comparison
Claude 4 Sonnet vs Qwen3.7 Plus
Head-to-head evidence from 14 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude 4 Sonnet #158 (Supported); Qwen3.7 Plus #21 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude 4 Sonnet and Qwen3.7 Plus share 14 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 2 results are unique to Claude 4 Sonnet; 55 to Qwen3.7 Plus.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 14
- Claude 4 Sonnet only
- 2
- Qwen3.7 Plus only
- 55
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Qwen3.7 Plus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude 4 Sonnet only becomes the better choice if you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 14 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Qwen3.7 Plus is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 67.22 to 42.79. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Qwen3.7 Plus's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 75.6 against 72.7. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 72.7% to 77.7%.
Qwen3.7 Plus is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude 4 Sonnet is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Qwen3.7 Plus gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude 4 Sonnet.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Claude 4 Sonnet | Δ | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Claude 4 Sonnet72.7 | Margin→ 2.9 | Qwen3.7 Plus75.6 |
| Agentic | Claude 4 SonnetNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Plus71.7 |
| Reasoning | Claude 4 SonnetNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Plus91.7 |
| Knowledge | Claude 4 SonnetNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Plus60.1 |
| Math | Claude 4 SonnetNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Plus92.9 |
| Multilingual | Claude 4 SonnetNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Plus85.4 |
| Multimodal | Claude 4 SonnetNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Plus81.5 |
| Inst. Following | Claude 4 SonnetNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Plus84.5 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 72.7%B 77.7%Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 5SWE-bench Verified: Claude 4 Sonnet scored 72.7%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 77.7%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude 4 Sonnet | Qwen3.7 Plus | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude 4 Sonnet$3 input / $15 output | Qwen3.7 PlusNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude 4 Sonnet40 tok/s | Qwen3.7 PlusNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude 4 Sonnet1.33 s | Qwen3.7 PlusNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude 4 Sonnet200K | Qwen3.7 Plus1M | Qwen3.7 Plus lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic18 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4 Sonnet | Qwen3.7 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 52.3% | 93% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 39.66% | — | Not comparable |
| JobBenchSource | 18.4% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 70.3% | Not comparable |
| QwenClawBenchSource | — | 61.8% | Not comparable |
| QwenWebBenchSource | — | 1536 | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 62.7% | Not comparable |
| BFCL v4Source | — | 72.9% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 73.2% | Not comparable |
| VITA-BenchSource | — | 45.6% | Not comparable |
| DeepPlanningSource | — | 62.3% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 73.3% | Not comparable |
| AndroidWorldSource | — | 81.0% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 20.8% | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 22.4% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 21.8% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 936 | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | — | 2.8% | Not comparable |
CodingQwen3.7 Plus wins9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4 Sonnet | Qwen3.7 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 72.7% | 77.7% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 37.3% | 45.5% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 70.3% | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | — | 57.6% | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | — | 75.8% | Not comparable |
| NL2RepoSource | — | 41.1% | Not comparable |
| SciCodeSource | — | 51.3% | Not comparable |
| LiveCodeBenchSource | — | 89.6% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 55.9% | Not comparable |
Reasoning3 benchmarks
Knowledge13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4 Sonnet | Qwen3.7 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 25.5% | 39.0% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 68.3% | 90.0% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| AA-HLESource | 4.0% | 33.4% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -9.2% | 2.4% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 22.4% | 22.2% | Claude 4 Sonnet leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 40.8% | 25.5% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| GPQASource | — | 90.3% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 90.3% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 34.7% | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 88.5% | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ReduxSource | — | 94.5% | Not comparable |
| SuperGPQASource | — | 71.4% | Not comparable |
| MMMLUSource | — | 89.0% | Not comparable |
Math3 benchmarks
Multilingual5 benchmarks
Multimodal17 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4 Sonnet | Qwen3.7 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 62.4% | 80.5% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1175 | 1288 | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| MMMU-ProSource | — | 79% | Not comparable |
| MathVisionSource | — | 90.3% | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | — | 85.9% | Not comparable |
| ERQASource | — | 69.8% | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (MM)Source | — | 71.0% | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | — | 79.0% | Not comparable |
| SimpleVQASource | — | 81.7% | Not comparable |
| MMSearch-PlusSource | — | 41.4% | Not comparable |
| RealWorldQASource | — | 86.9% | Not comparable |
| OmniDocBench 1.5Source | — | 91.4% | Not comparable |
| OCRBench V2Source | — | 70.7% | Not comparable |
| ODINW13Source | — | 51.1% | Not comparable |
| Video-MME (with subtitle)Source | — | 88.0% | Not comparable |
| VideoMMMUSource | — | 85.4% | Not comparable |
| MLVU (M-Avg)Source | — | 87.4% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Claude 4 Sonnet or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 67.22 to 42.79. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 72.7% and 77.7%.
Which is better for coding, Claude 4 Sonnet or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 75.6 versus 72.7. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.