Model comparison
Gemma 4 12B vs Qwen3.7 Max
Head-to-head evidence from 16 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Gemma 4 12B #137 (Estimated); Qwen3.7 Max #10 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemma 4 12B and Qwen3.7 Max share 16 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 7 results are unique to Gemma 4 12B; 42 to Qwen3.7 Max.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 16
- Gemma 4 12B only
- 7
- Qwen3.7 Max only
- 42
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Pick Qwen3.7 Max if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 12B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 16 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 3 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 Max is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 72.84 to 47.29. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Qwen3.7 Max's sharpest advantage is in reasoning, where it averages 90.4 against 43.4. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is MRCRv2, 43.4% to 90.4%. Gemma 4 12B does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Qwen3.7 Max gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Gemma 4 12B.
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 | Gemma 4 12B | Δ | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reasoning | Gemma 4 12B43.4 | Margin→ 47.0 | Qwen3.7 Max90.4 |
| Math | Gemma 4 12B77.5 | Margin→ 19.6 | Qwen3.7 Max97.1 |
| Knowledge | Gemma 4 12B77.5 | Margin← 13.3 | Qwen3.7 Max64.2 |
| Agentic | Gemma 4 12BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Max69.7 |
| Coding | Gemma 4 12BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Max77.9 |
| Multilingual | Gemma 4 12BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Max87.0 |
| Multimodal | Gemma 4 12B69.1 | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 MaxNot measured |
| Inst. Following | Gemma 4 12BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Max84.4 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
MRCRv2
ReasoningA 43.4%B 90.4%Winner: Qwen3.7 MaxΔ 47MRCRv2: Gemma 4 12B scored 43.4%; Qwen3.7 Max scored 90.4%. Qwen3.7 Max wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 78.8%B 92.4%Winner: Qwen3.7 MaxΔ 13.6GPQA: Gemma 4 12B scored 78.8%; Qwen3.7 Max scored 92.4%. Qwen3.7 Max wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMLU-Pro
KnowledgeA 77.2%B 89.6%Winner: Qwen3.7 MaxΔ 12.4MMLU-Pro: Gemma 4 12B scored 77.2%; Qwen3.7 Max scored 89.6%. Qwen3.7 Max wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Gemma 4 12B | Qwen3.7 Max | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemma 4 12BNot available | Qwen3.7 MaxNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemma 4 12BNot available | Qwen3.7 MaxNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemma 4 12BNot available | Qwen3.7 MaxNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemma 4 12B256K | Qwen3.7 Max1M | Qwen3.7 Max lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic21 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 12B | Qwen3.7 Max | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 36.3% | 94.7% | Qwen3.7 Max leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 69.7% | Not comparable |
| QwenClawBenchSource | — | 64.3% | Not comparable |
| QwenWebBenchSource | — | 1568 | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 65.2% | Not comparable |
| BFCL v4Source | — | 75.0% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 76.4% | Not comparable |
| VITA-BenchSource | — | 47.9% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | — | 53.5% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 30.6% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 38.7% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1273 | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 64.27% | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | — | 18.7% | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 908 | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | — | 25.6% | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | — | 45.0% | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | — | 42.5% | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | — | 50.8% | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | — | 74.5% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 83.4% | Not comparable |
Coding9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 12B | Qwen3.7 Max | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-SciCodeSource | 38.2% | 48.8% | Qwen3.7 Max leads |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 80.4% | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | — | 60.6% | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | — | 78.3% | Not comparable |
| NL2RepoSource | — | 47.2% | Not comparable |
| SciCodeSource | — | 53.5% | Not comparable |
| LiveCodeBenchSource | — | 91.6% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 69.7% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 66.0% | Not comparable |
ReasoningQwen3.7 Max wins4 benchmarks
KnowledgeGemma 4 12B wins14 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 12B | Qwen3.7 Max | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 78.8% | 92.4% | Qwen3.7 Max leads |
| GPQA-DSource | 78.8% | 92.4% | Qwen3.7 Max leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | 77.2% | 89.6% | Qwen3.7 Max leads |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 5.2% | — | Not comparable |
| MMMLUSource | 83.4% | 90.3% | Qwen3.7 Max leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 22.0% | 46.0% | Qwen3.7 Max leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 75.3% | 92.3% | Qwen3.7 Max leads |
| AA-HLESource | 14.8% | 38.1% | Qwen3.7 Max leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -51.9% | 14.1% | Qwen3.7 Max leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 16.0% | 30.1% | Qwen3.7 Max leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 80.8% | 22.9% | Qwen3.7 Max leads |
| HLESource | — | 41.4% | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ReduxSource | — | 95% | Not comparable |
| SuperGPQASource | — | 73.6% | Not comparable |
MathQwen3.7 Max wins4 benchmarks
Multilingual5 benchmarks
Multimodal5 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, Gemma 4 12B or Qwen3.7 Max?
Qwen3.7 Max is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 72.84 to 47.29. The biggest single separator in this matchup is MRCRv2, where the scores are 43.4% and 90.4%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Gemma 4 12B or Qwen3.7 Max?
Gemma 4 12B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 77.5 versus 64.2. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, Gemma 4 12B or Qwen3.7 Max?
Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 97.1 versus 77.5. Gemma 4 12B stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Which is better for reasoning, Gemma 4 12B or Qwen3.7 Max?
Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 90.4 versus 43.4. Inside this category, MRCRv2 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
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.