Head-to-head comparison across 3benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Grok 4.20
64
Qwen3.7 Max
93
Verified leaderboard positions: Grok 4.20 unranked · Qwen3.7 Max #2
Pick Qwen3.7 Max if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok 4.20 only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 2M context window.
Agentic
+22.6 difference
Coding
+12.6 difference
Reasoning
+37.1 difference
Grok 4.20
Qwen3.7 Max
$2 / $6
$null / $null
233 t/s
N/A
10.33s
N/A
2M
1M
Pick Qwen3.7 Max if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok 4.20 only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 2M context window.
Qwen3.7 Max is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 93 to 64. 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 53.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 47.1% to 69.7%.
Grok 4.20 gives you the larger context window at 2M, compared with 1M for Qwen3.7 Max.
Qwen3.7 Max is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 93 to 64. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 47.1% and 69.7%.
Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 73.6 versus 61. Inside this category, SWE-bench Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 90.4 versus 53.3. Grok 4.20 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 69.7 versus 47.1. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.