Model comparison
Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Qwen3.7 Plus
Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Haiku 4.5 #77 (Estimated); Qwen3.7 Plus #21 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Haiku 4.5 and Qwen3.7 Plus share 2 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 3 results are unique to Claude Haiku 4.5; 67 to Qwen3.7 Plus.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 2
- Claude Haiku 4.5 only
- 3
- Qwen3.7 Plus only
- 67
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick Qwen3.7 Plus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Haiku 4.5 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 2 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 2 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 56.58. 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 mathematics, where it averages 92.9 against 4.9. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 73.3% to 77.7%.
Qwen3.7 Plus is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude Haiku 4.5 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 Haiku 4.5.
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 Haiku 4.5 | Δ | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | Claude Haiku 4.54.9 | Margin→ 88.0 | Qwen3.7 Plus92.9 |
| Coding | Claude Haiku 4.573.3 | Margin→ 2.3 | Qwen3.7 Plus75.6 |
| Agentic | Claude Haiku 4.5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Plus71.7 |
| Reasoning | Claude Haiku 4.5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Plus91.7 |
| Knowledge | Claude Haiku 4.5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Plus60.1 |
| Multilingual | Claude Haiku 4.5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Plus85.4 |
| Multimodal | Claude Haiku 4.5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Plus81.5 |
| Inst. Following | Claude Haiku 4.5Not 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 73.3%B 77.7%Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 4.4SWE-bench Verified: Claude Haiku 4.5 scored 73.3%; 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 Haiku 4.5 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Haiku 4.5$1 input / $5 output | Qwen3.7 PlusNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Haiku 4.5Not available | Qwen3.7 PlusNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Haiku 4.5Not available | Qwen3.7 PlusNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Haiku 4.5200K | Qwen3.7 Plus1M | Qwen3.7 Plus lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic17 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| JobBenchSource | 16.0% | — | 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 |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 93% | 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 Haiku 4.5 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 73.3% | 77.7% | 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 |
| AA-SciCodeSource | — | 45.5% | Not comparable |
Reasoning3 benchmarks
Knowledge13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 39.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 90.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 33.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | 2.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 22.2% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 25.5% | Not comparable |
MathQwen3.7 Plus wins5 benchmarks
Multilingual5 benchmarks
Multimodal17 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Haiku 4.5 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1152 | 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 |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | — | 80.5% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 67.22 to 56.58. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 73.3% and 77.7%.
Which is better for coding, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 75.6 versus 73.3. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 92.9 versus 4.9. Claude Haiku 4.5 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
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.