Skip to main content

Model comparison

GPT-5.4 vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 32 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

OpenAI
74.24/100
Margin
7.0pts
← winning
67.22/100
1 category wins4 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: GPT-5.4 #8 (Supported); Qwen3.7 Plus #21 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. GPT-5.4 and Qwen3.7 Plus share 32 comparable benchmark results. 5 of 8 categories are comparable. 20 results are unique to GPT-5.4; 37 to Qwen3.7 Plus.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
32
GPT-5.4 only
20
Qwen3.7 Plus only
37
Comparable categories
5 / 8

Pick GPT-5.4 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.7 Plus only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 32 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 5 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

GPT-5.4 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 74.24 to 67.22. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

GPT-5.4's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 77.2 against 71.7. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HLE, 52.1% to 34.7%. Qwen3.7 Plus does hit back in mathematics, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

GPT-5.4 gives you the larger context window at 1.05M, compared with 1M for Qwen3.7 Plus.

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-5.4 and Qwen3.7 Plus
CategoryGPT-5.4ΔQwen3.7 Plus
MathGPT-5.442.5Margin 50.4Qwen3.7 Plus92.9
CodingGPT-5.457.7Margin 17.9Qwen3.7 Plus75.6
MultimodalGPT-5.473.2Margin 8.3Qwen3.7 Plus81.5
AgenticGPT-5.477.2Margin 5.5Qwen3.7 Plus71.7
KnowledgeGPT-5.457.6Margin 2.5Qwen3.7 Plus60.1
ReasoningGPT-5.4Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Plus91.7
MultilingualGPT-5.4Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Plus85.4
Inst. FollowingGPT-5.4Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Plus84.5

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · GPT-5.4B · Qwen3.7 Plus
  1. HLE

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 52.1%B 34.7%
    Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 17.4
    HLE: GPT-5.4 scored 52.1%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 34.7%. GPT-5.4 wins this benchmark.
  2. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 75.1%B 70.3%
    Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 4.8
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: GPT-5.4 scored 75.1%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 70.3%. GPT-5.4 wins this benchmark.
  3. CharXiv

    Multimodal
    Source ↗
    A 82.8%B 85.9%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 3.1
    CharXiv: GPT-5.4 scored 82.8%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 85.9%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark.
  4. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 92.8%B 90.3%
    Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 2.5
    GPQA: GPT-5.4 scored 92.8%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 90.3%. GPT-5.4 wins this benchmark.
  5. MMMU-Pro

    Multimodal
    Source ↗
    A 81.2%B 79%
    Winner: GPT-5.4Δ 2.2
    MMMU-Pro: GPT-5.4 scored 81.2%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 79%. GPT-5.4 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricGPT-5.4Qwen3.7 PlusComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGPT-5.4$2.5 input / $15 outputQwen3.7 PlusNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondGPT-5.474 tok/sQwen3.7 PlusNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGPT-5.4151.79 sQwen3.7 PlusNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGPT-5.41.05MQwen3.7 Plus1MGPT-5.4 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticGPT-5.4 wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Qwen3.7 PlusResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 75.1%70.3%GPT-5.4 leads
CyberGymSource 79.0%Not comparable
BrowseCompSource 82.7%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 75%73.3%GPT-5.4 leads
MCP AtlasSource 70.6%73.2%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
ToolathlonSource 54.6%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 87.1%93%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Claw-EvalSource 60.3%62.7%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
DeepSearchQASource 73.6%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 41.1%20.8%GPT-5.4 leads
APEX-Agents-AASource 33.3%22.4%GPT-5.4 leads
GDPval-AASource 44.7%21.8%GPT-5.4 leads
GDPval-AASource 1395936GPT-5.4 leads
Gert LabsSource 64.89%Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource 15.3%Not comparable
JobBenchSource 38.9%Not comparable
ExploitGymSource 6.0%Not comparable
QwenClawBenchSource 61.8%Not comparable
QwenWebBenchSource 1536Not comparable
BFCL v4Source 72.9%Not comparable
VITA-BenchSource 45.6%Not comparable
DeepPlanningSource 62.3%Not comparable
AndroidWorldSource 81.0%Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source 2.8%Not comparable
CodingQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Qwen3.7 PlusResult
LiveCodeBench ProSource 87.5%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 57.7%57.6%GPT-5.4 leads
React Native EvalsSource 85.3%Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource 67.42%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 71.0%55.9%GPT-5.4 leads
AA-SciCodeSource 56.6%45.5%GPT-5.4 leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 70.3%Not comparable
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 77.7%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-5.4Qwen3.7 PlusResult
AA-LCRSource 74.0%65.0%GPT-5.4 leads
CritPtSource 23.4%9.1%GPT-5.4 leads
MRCRv2Source 91.7%Not comparable
KnowledgeQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Qwen3.7 PlusResult
GPQASource 92.8%90.3%GPT-5.4 leads
HLESource 52.1%34.7%GPT-5.4 leads
HLE w/o toolsSource 39.8%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 92.8%90.3%GPT-5.4 leads
HealthBench HardSource 40.1%Not comparable
MedXpertQA (Text)Source 59.6%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 51.4%39.0%GPT-5.4 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 92.0%90.0%GPT-5.4 leads
AA-HLESource 41.6%33.4%GPT-5.4 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 5.7%2.4%GPT-5.4 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 50.0%22.2%GPT-5.4 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 88.6%25.5%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
HealthBench ProfessionalSource 48.1%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-5.4Qwen3.7 PlusResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 47.600%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 27.100%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source 92.9%Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource 86.0%Not comparable
ApexSource 22.7%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Qwen3.7 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
MultimodalQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Qwen3.7 PlusResult
MMMU-ProSource 81.2%79%GPT-5.4 leads
OfficeQA ProSource 53.2%Not comparable
MMMU-Pro w/ PythonSource 82.1%Not comparable
CharXivSource 82.8%85.9%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
ERQASource 65.4%69.8%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
SimpleVQASource 61.1%81.7%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
ScreenSpot ProSource 85.4%79.0%GPT-5.4 leads
ZeroBenchSource 41.0%Not comparable
MedXpertQA (MM)Source 77.1%71.0%GPT-5.4 leads
AA-MMMU-ProSource 78.4%80.5%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Design Arena WebsiteSource 12501288Qwen3.7 Plus leads
MathVisionSource 90.3%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-5.4Qwen3.7 PlusResult
AA-IFBenchSource 73.9%78.0%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
IFEvalSource 94.6%Not comparable
IFBenchSource 79.1%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (6)

Which is better, GPT-5.4 or Qwen3.7 Plus?

GPT-5.4 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 74.24 to 67.22. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HLE, where the scores are 52.1% and 34.7%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, GPT-5.4 or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 60.1 versus 57.6. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, GPT-5.4 or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 75.6 versus 57.7. Inside this category, AA Coding Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, GPT-5.4 or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 92.9 versus 42.5. GPT-5.4 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5.4 or Qwen3.7 Plus?

GPT-5.4 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 77.2 versus 71.7. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, GPT-5.4 or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.5 versus 73.2. Inside this category, Design Arena Website is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

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.