Skip to main content
Radar

Five or fewer confirmed AI changes, with original sources, on mornings when something changed.A free source-linked morning brief.

Start free brief
BenchLM
Model A
Claude Sonnet 4.6

Anthropic

64.5/100

Supported · Public rank #40

90% interval 51.9–77.2

Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Qwen3.7 Max

Updated August 18, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.

Model B
Qwen3.7 Max

Alibaba

71.6/100

Supported · Public rank #16

90% interval 64.6–78.6

Decision reading

Qwen3.7 Max has the higher public score estimate, 71.6 versus 64.53, but the 90% score intervals overlap. Treat that as a lead, not a settled winner.

8 results are shared. Category rows based on different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Which one for your work

Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.

  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    Qwen3.7 Max

    Qwen3.7 Max has the larger documented context window.

    Confidence: documented

Show secondary and unsupported calls

  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Not enough matched evidence

    The category averages use different weighted benchmark sets, so they are directional rather than like-for-like.

    Confidence: limited

  • Agentic work

    Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion

    Not enough matched evidence

    The category averages use different weighted benchmark sets, so they are directional rather than like-for-like.

    Confidence: limited

  • Chat turn cost

    1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Cache-heavy agent loop cost

    200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    The page does not recommend a cost winner because at least one model cannot fit the stated workload in one request. Claude Sonnet 4.6 does not fit this workload in one request. Claude Sonnet 4.6 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. Qwen3.7 Max has no comparable published API token rate.

    Confidence: rate-fallback

  • Repository review cost

    50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

What is actually comparable

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.

Shared results
8
Claude Sonnet 4.6 only
14
Qwen3.7 Max only
27
Like-for-like categories
1 / 8

2 categories use different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row states whether both averages use the same weighted benchmark set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner in this template.

Knowledge

Like-for-like
Claude Sonnet 4.6
66.0
Qwen3.7 Max
64.2
Weighted basis
4 vs 4 rows
Reading
Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads

Agentic

Directional only
Claude Sonnet 4.6
65.2
Qwen3.7 Max
69.7
Weighted basis
2 vs 1 rows
Reading
Directional only

Coding

Directional only
Claude Sonnet 4.6
69.1
Qwen3.7 Max
77.9
Weighted basis
2 vs 4 rows
Reading
Directional only

Reasoning

Not comparable
Claude Sonnet 4.6
Not measured
Qwen3.7 Max
90.4
Weighted basis
0 vs 1 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
Claude Sonnet 4.6
26.4
Qwen3.7 Max
97.1
Weighted basis
2 vs 1 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
Claude Sonnet 4.6
Not measured
Qwen3.7 Max
87.0
Weighted basis
0 vs 1 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
Claude Sonnet 4.6
77.4
Qwen3.7 Max
Not measured
Weighted basis
1 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
Claude Sonnet 4.6
Not measured
Qwen3.7 Max
84.4
Weighted basis
0 vs 2 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Shape of the matched evidence

Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.

Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.

Chat turn

1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

Claude Sonnet 4.6
$0.0105
Fits in one request
Qwen3.7 Max
API rate not published
Fits in one request

Qwen3.7 Max has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

Claude Sonnet 4.6
$0.195
Fits in one request
Qwen3.7 Max
API rate not published
Fits in one request

Qwen3.7 Max has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

Claude Sonnet 4.6
$0.81
Does not fit in one request
Cached input priced at the published list-input rate
Qwen3.7 Max
API rate not published
Fits in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable

Claude Sonnet 4.6 does not fit this workload in one request. Claude Sonnet 4.6 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. Qwen3.7 Max has no comparable published API token rate.

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

Context window

Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.

Claude Sonnet 4.6

200K

Qwen3.7 Max

1M

API model ID

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Not sourced

Qwen3.7 Max

Not sourced

Cached-input rate

A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Not published

Qwen3.7 Max

No comparable hosted API rate

Documented inputs

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Not sourced

Qwen3.7 Max

Not sourced

Documented outputs

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Not sourced

Qwen3.7 Max

Not sourced

Provider availability

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Not sourced

Qwen3.7 Max

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Non-Reasoning

Qwen3.7 Max

Reasoning

Weight access

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Proprietary

Qwen3.7 Max

Proprietary

License

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Proprietary

Qwen3.7 Max

Proprietary

Release date

Claude Sonnet 4.6

2026-02-01

Qwen3.7 Max

2026-05-16

If you already use one of these models
Deployment change
The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
Quality signal
Qwen3.7 Max has the higher public score estimate, 71.6 versus 64.53, but the 90% score intervals overlap.
Workload cost
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff
Qwen3.7 Max has the larger documented window (1M).

Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Benchmark evidence

The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.

Browse raw public benchmark evidence49 rows

Agentic

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Claude Sonnet 4.659.1%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max69.7%
    Source

    Qwen3.7 Max leads this result

  • OSWorld-Verified

    Claude Sonnet 4.672.1%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max—

    Not directly comparable

  • Claw-Eval

    Claude Sonnet 4.667.8%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max65.2%
    Source

    Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads this result

  • CyberGym

    Claude Sonnet 4.665.2%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max—

    Not directly comparable

  • Gert Labs

    Shared source
    Claude Sonnet 4.662.92%
    Qwen3.7 Max64.27%

    Qwen3.7 Max leads this result

  • OSWorld 2.0

    Claude Sonnet 4.68.3%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max—

    Not directly comparable

  • JobBench

    Claude Sonnet 4.636.9%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max—

    Not directly comparable

  • QwenClawBench

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max64.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • BFCL v4

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max75.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MCP Atlas

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max76.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • VITA-Bench

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max47.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE w/ tools

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max53.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ResearchClawBench

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max18.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • SWE-bench Verified

    Claude Sonnet 4.679.6%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max80.4%
    Source

    Qwen3.7 Max leads this result

  • SWE-Rebench

    Claude Sonnet 4.660.7%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max—

    Not directly comparable

  • React Native Evals

    Claude Sonnet 4.680.6%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max—

    Not directly comparable

  • Vibe Code Bench

    Claude Sonnet 4.651.48%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max—

    Not directly comparable

  • cursorBench31

    Claude Sonnet 4.648.8%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max—

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierCode 1.1 Main

    Claude Sonnet 4.624.3%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max—

    Not directly comparable

  • EEBench

    Claude Sonnet 4.620.4%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max—

    Not directly comparable

  • CADGenBench Generation

    Claude Sonnet 4.622.1%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max—

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench Pro

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max60.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE Multilingual

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max78.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • NL2Repo

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max47.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SciCode

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max53.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • LiveCodeBench

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max91.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max69.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Reasoning

  • MRCRv2

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max90.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • CritPt

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max13.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • GPQA

    Claude Sonnet 4.689.9%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max92.4%
    Source

    Qwen3.7 Max leads this result

  • SuperGPQA

    Claude Sonnet 4.695%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max73.6%
    Source

    Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads this result

  • MMLU-Pro

    Claude Sonnet 4.679.2%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max89.6%
    Source

    Qwen3.7 Max leads this result

  • HLE

    Claude Sonnet 4.649%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max41.4%
    Source

    Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads this result

  • GPQA-D

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max92.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Redux

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max95%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMMLU

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max90.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Math

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Claude Sonnet 4.632.400%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max—

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    Claude Sonnet 4.68.300%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max—

    Not directly comparable

  • HMMT Feb 2026

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max97.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • IMOAnswerBench

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max90.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Apex

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max44.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Multilingual

  • MMLU-ProX

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max87%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • NOVA-63

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max59.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • INCLUDE

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max86.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MAXIFE

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max89.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • PolyMath

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max86.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Multimodal

  • CharXiv

    Claude Sonnet 4.677.4%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max—

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • IFEval

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max94.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • IFBench

    Claude Sonnet 4.6—
    Qwen3.7 Max79.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Frequently asked questions

Which is better, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max has the higher public score estimate, 71.6 versus 64.53, but the 90% score intervals overlap. The higher estimate is not a decisive winner because the uncertainty ranges overlap.

Which is better for coding, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Qwen3.7 Max?

The current coding averages use different weighted benchmark sets, so BenchLM does not name a winner from them. Read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Qwen3.7 Max?

The current agentic tasks averages use different weighted benchmark sets, so BenchLM does not name a winner from them. Read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.

Which costs less, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Qwen3.7 Max?

Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.

Which has the larger context window, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max has the larger documented context window: 1M, compared with 200K.

Related comparisons

Compare API pricing Read the methodology Open the model selector

Last updated August 18, 2026

Watch Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Qwen3.7 Max

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.