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
Gemini 3 Flash

Google

59.7/100

Supported · Public rank #65

90% interval 40.6–78.8

Gemini 3 Flash 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 59.74, but the 90% score intervals overlap. Treat that as a lead, not a settled winner.

2 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.

No workload recommendation clears the current evidence threshold.

Use the matched evidence, workload costs, and sourced specifications below instead of treating a point score as a universal answer.

Show secondary and unsupported calls

  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Not enough matched evidence

    No shared weighted benchmark basis supports a winner.

    Confidence: limited

  • Agentic work

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

    Not enough matched evidence

    No shared weighted benchmark basis supports a winner.

    Confidence: limited

  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    No clear pick

    The documented context windows are equal.

    Confidence: documented

  • 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

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

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • 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
2
Gemini 3 Flash only
5
Qwen3.7 Max only
33
Like-for-like categories
0 / 8

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.

Agentic

Not comparable
Gemini 3 Flash
Not measured
Qwen3.7 Max
69.7
Weighted basis
0 vs 1 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Coding

Not comparable
Gemini 3 Flash
Not measured
Qwen3.7 Max
77.9
Weighted basis
0 vs 4 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable
Gemini 3 Flash
Not measured
Qwen3.7 Max
90.4
Weighted basis
0 vs 1 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Knowledge

Not comparable
Gemini 3 Flash
Not measured
Qwen3.7 Max
64.2
Weighted basis
0 vs 4 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
Gemini 3 Flash
27.8
Qwen3.7 Max
97.1
Weighted basis
2 vs 1 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
Gemini 3 Flash
Not measured
Qwen3.7 Max
87.0
Weighted basis
0 vs 1 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
Gemini 3 Flash
Not measured
Qwen3.7 Max
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
Gemini 3 Flash
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.

A shared-evidence shape is not available.

BenchLM does not draw a radar or infer missing axes when the matched evidence is too sparse.

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

Gemini 3 Flash
$0.002
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

Gemini 3 Flash
$0.034
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

Gemini 3 Flash
$0.05
Fits in one request
Qwen3.7 Max
API rate not published
Fits in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable

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.

Qwen3.7 Max

1M

Cached-input rate

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

Gemini 3 Flash

$0.05 per 1M cached input tokens

Google Gemini API pricing

Qwen3.7 Max

No comparable hosted API rate

Documented inputs

Gemini 3 Flash

Not sourced

Qwen3.7 Max

Not sourced

Documented outputs

Gemini 3 Flash

Not sourced

Qwen3.7 Max

Not sourced

Provider availability

Gemini 3 Flash

Not sourced

Qwen3.7 Max

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

Gemini 3 Flash

Non-Reasoning

Qwen3.7 Max

Reasoning

Weight access

Gemini 3 Flash

Proprietary

Qwen3.7 Max

Proprietary

License

Gemini 3 Flash

Proprietary

Qwen3.7 Max

Proprietary

Release date

Gemini 3 Flash

2025-12-01

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 59.74, but the 90% score intervals overlap.
Workload cost
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff
Both models list 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 evidence40 rows

Agentic

  • Claw-Eval

    Gemini 3 Flash49.2%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max65.2%
    Source

    Qwen3.7 Max leads this result

  • Gert Labs

    Shared source
    Gemini 3 Flash56.63%
    Qwen3.7 Max64.27%

    Qwen3.7 Max leads this result

  • JobBench

    Gemini 3 Flash11.4%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max69.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • QwenClawBench

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max64.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • BFCL v4

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max75.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MCP Atlas

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max76.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • VITA-Bench

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max47.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE w/ tools

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max53.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ResearchClawBench

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max18.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • Vibe Code Bench

    Gemini 3 Flash20.20%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max—

    Not directly comparable

  • EEBench

    Gemini 3 Flash19.5%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max—

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench Verified

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max80.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench Pro

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max60.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE Multilingual

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max78.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • NL2Repo

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max47.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SciCode

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max53.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • LiveCodeBench

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max91.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max69.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Reasoning

  • MRCRv2

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max90.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • CritPt

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max13.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • GPQA

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max92.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA-D

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max92.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max41.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Pro

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max89.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Redux

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max95%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SuperGPQA

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max73.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMMLU

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max90.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Math

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Gemini 3 Flash35.640%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max—

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    Gemini 3 Flash4.167%
    Source
    Qwen3.7 Max—

    Not directly comparable

  • HMMT Feb 2026

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max97.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • IMOAnswerBench

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max90.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Apex

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max44.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Multilingual

  • MMLU-ProX

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max87%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • NOVA-63

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max59.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • INCLUDE

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max86.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MAXIFE

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max89.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • PolyMath

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max86.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • IFEval

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max94.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • IFBench

    Gemini 3 Flash—
    Qwen3.7 Max79.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Frequently asked questions

Which is better, Gemini 3 Flash or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max has the higher public score estimate, 71.6 versus 59.74, but the 90% score intervals overlap. The higher estimate is not a decisive winner because the uncertainty ranges overlap.

Which is better for coding, Gemini 3 Flash or Qwen3.7 Max?

The published evidence does not provide a shared weighted coding basis for both models, so BenchLM does not name a coding winner.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Gemini 3 Flash or Qwen3.7 Max?

The published evidence does not provide a shared weighted agentic tasks basis for both models, so BenchLM does not name a agentic tasks winner.

Which costs less, Gemini 3 Flash 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, Gemini 3 Flash or Qwen3.7 Max?

Both models list the same context window, 1M.

Related comparisons

Compare API pricing Read the methodology Open the model selector

Last updated August 18, 2026

Watch Gemini 3 Flash 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.