Model comparison
GPT-5.2 vs Qwen3.7 Plus
Head-to-head evidence from 19 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: GPT-5.2 #64 (Estimated); Qwen3.7 Plus #21 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GPT-5.2 and Qwen3.7 Plus share 19 comparable benchmark results. 6 of 8 categories are comparable. 9 results are unique to GPT-5.2; 50 to Qwen3.7 Plus.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 19
- GPT-5.2 only
- 9
- Qwen3.7 Plus only
- 50
- Comparable categories
- 6 / 8
Pick Qwen3.7 Plus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-5.2 only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 19 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 6 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 58.43. 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 35.2. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is OSWorld-Verified, 47.3% to 73.3%. GPT-5.2 does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Qwen3.7 Plus gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 400K for GPT-5.2.
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 | GPT-5.2 | Δ | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | GPT-5.235.2 | Margin→ 57.7 | Qwen3.7 Plus92.9 |
| Reasoning | GPT-5.252.9 | Margin→ 38.8 | Qwen3.7 Plus91.7 |
| Knowledge | GPT-5.292.4 | Margin← 32.3 | Qwen3.7 Plus60.1 |
| Agentic | GPT-5.255.7 | Margin→ 16.0 | Qwen3.7 Plus71.7 |
| Coding | GPT-5.270.6 | Margin→ 5.0 | Qwen3.7 Plus75.6 |
| Multimodal | GPT-5.280.4 | Margin→ 1.1 | Qwen3.7 Plus81.5 |
| Multilingual | GPT-5.2Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Plus85.4 |
| Inst. Following | GPT-5.2Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Plus84.5 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
OSWorld-Verified
AgenticA 47.3%B 73.3%Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 26OSWorld-Verified: GPT-5.2 scored 47.3%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 73.3%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
CharXiv
MultimodalA 82.1%B 85.9%Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 3.8CharXiv: GPT-5.2 scored 82.1%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 85.9%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 80%B 77.7%Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 2.3SWE-bench Verified: GPT-5.2 scored 80%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 77.7%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 92.4%B 90.3%Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 2.1GPQA: GPT-5.2 scored 92.4%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 90.3%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 55.6%B 57.6%Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 2SWE-bench Pro: GPT-5.2 scored 55.6%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 57.6%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GPT-5.2 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GPT-5.2$1.75 input / $14 output | Qwen3.7 PlusNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GPT-5.273 tok/s | Qwen3.7 PlusNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GPT-5.2130.34 s | Qwen3.7 PlusNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GPT-5.2400K | Qwen3.7 Plus1M | Qwen3.7 Plus lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticQwen3.7 Plus wins19 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| BrowseCompSource | 65.8% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 47.3% | 73.3% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 84.8% | 93% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 46.54% | — | Not comparable |
| JobBenchSource | 34.3% | — | 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 |
| AndroidWorldSource | — | 81.0% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 20.8% | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 22.4% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 21.8% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 936 | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | — | 2.8% | Not comparable |
CodingQwen3.7 Plus wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 80% | 77.7% | GPT-5.2 leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 55.6% | 57.6% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 53.50% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 52.1% | 45.5% | GPT-5.2 leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 70.3% | 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 |
ReasoningQwen3.7 Plus wins4 benchmarks
KnowledgeGPT-5.2 wins13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 92.4% | 90.3% | GPT-5.2 leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 42.2% | 39.0% | GPT-5.2 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 90.3% | 90.0% | GPT-5.2 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 35.4% | 33.4% | GPT-5.2 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -1.0% | 2.4% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 43.8% | 22.2% | GPT-5.2 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 79.7% | 25.5% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| 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 wins6 benchmarks
Multilingual5 benchmarks
MultimodalQwen3.7 Plus wins18 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | 79.5% | 79% | GPT-5.2 leads |
| MathVisionSource | 83.0% | 90.3% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| CharXivSource | 82.1% | 85.9% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| V*Source | 75.9% | — | Not comparable |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1224 | 1288 | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| 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 (7)
Which is better, GPT-5.2 or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 67.22 to 58.43. The biggest single separator in this matchup is OSWorld-Verified, where the scores are 47.3% and 73.3%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, GPT-5.2 or Qwen3.7 Plus?
GPT-5.2 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 92.4 versus 60.1. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, GPT-5.2 or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 75.6 versus 70.6. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, GPT-5.2 or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 92.9 versus 35.2. GPT-5.2 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Which is better for reasoning, GPT-5.2 or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 91.7 versus 52.9. Inside this category, AA-LCR is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5.2 or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 71.7 versus 55.7. Inside this category, OSWorld-Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, GPT-5.2 or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.5 versus 80.4. Inside this category, Design Arena Website 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.