Skip to main content

Model comparison

GPT-5.1 vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 17 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

OpenAI
53.65/100
Margin
13.6pts
winning →
67.22/100
0 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: GPT-5.1 #94 (Estimated); Qwen3.7 Plus #21 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. GPT-5.1 and Qwen3.7 Plus share 17 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 4 results are unique to GPT-5.1; 52 to Qwen3.7 Plus.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
17
GPT-5.1 only
4
Qwen3.7 Plus only
52
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick Qwen3.7 Plus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-5.1 only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 17 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 53.65. 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 26.4.

Qwen3.7 Plus gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for GPT-5.1.

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 scores and score margins for GPT-5.1 and Qwen3.7 Plus
CategoryGPT-5.1ΔQwen3.7 Plus
MathGPT-5.126.4Margin 66.5Qwen3.7 Plus92.9
AgenticGPT-5.1Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Plus71.7
CodingGPT-5.1Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Plus75.6
ReasoningGPT-5.1Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Plus91.7
KnowledgeGPT-5.1Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Plus60.1
MultilingualGPT-5.1Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Plus85.4
MultimodalGPT-5.1Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Plus81.5
Inst. FollowingGPT-5.1Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Plus84.5

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricGPT-5.1Qwen3.7 PlusComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGPT-5.1$1.25 input / $10 outputQwen3.7 PlusNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondGPT-5.1111 tok/sQwen3.7 PlusNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGPT-5.157.47 sQwen3.7 PlusNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGPT-5.1200KQwen3.7 Plus1MQwen3.7 Plus lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Qwen3.7 PlusResult
AA Agentic IndexSource 21.0%20.8%GPT-5.1 leads
τ²-bench resultsSource 81.9%93%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Gert LabsSource 41.24%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 24.4%21.8%GPT-5.1 leads
GDPval-AASource 987936GPT-5.1 leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 70.3%Not comparable
QwenClawBenchSource 61.8%Not comparable
QwenWebBenchSource 1536Not 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
APEX-Agents-AASource 22.4%Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source 2.8%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Qwen3.7 PlusResult
Vibe Code BenchSource 24.61%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 49.4%55.9%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-SciCodeSource 43.3%45.5%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 70.3%Not comparable
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 77.7%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
Reasoning
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Qwen3.7 PlusResult
AA-LCRSource 75.0%65.0%GPT-5.1 leads
CritPtSource 4.9%9.1%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
MRCRv2Source 91.7%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Qwen3.7 PlusResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 36.9%39.0%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 87.3%90.0%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-HLESource 26.5%33.4%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 5.6%2.4%GPT-5.1 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 37.6%22.2%GPT-5.1 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 51.3%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
MathQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Qwen3.7 PlusResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 31.034%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 12.500%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source 92.9%Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource 86.0%Not comparable
ApexSource 22.7%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Qwen3.7 PlusResult
MMLU-ProXSource 85.4%Not comparable
NOVA-63Source 58.8%Not comparable
INCLUDESource 83.0%Not comparable
MAXIFESource 88.8%Not comparable
PolyMathSource 84.0%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Qwen3.7 PlusResult
AA-MMMU-ProSource 75.5%80.5%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Design Arena WebsiteSource 12171288Qwen3.7 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
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Qwen3.7 PlusResult
AA-IFBenchSource 72.9%78.0%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
IFEvalSource 94.6%Not comparable
IFBenchSource 79.1%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, GPT-5.1 or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 67.22 to 53.65.

Which is better for math, GPT-5.1 or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 92.9 versus 26.4. GPT-5.1 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 23, 2026

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.