Model comparison
Inkling vs Qwen3.7 Plus
Head-to-head evidence from 11 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Verified leaderboard positions: Inkling #17; Qwen3.7 Plus #4
BenchAlign evidence: Inkling not scored; Qwen3.7 Plus supported. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Inkling and Qwen3.7 Plus share 11 comparable benchmark results. 6 of 8 categories are comparable. 5 results are unique to Inkling; 59 to Qwen3.7 Plus.
Updated July 15, 2026- Shared results
- 11
- Inkling only
- 5
- Qwen3.7 Plus only
- 59
- Comparable categories
- 6 / 8
Pick Qwen3.7 Plus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Inkling only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 11 shared benchmark results across 5 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 provisional aggregate, 77 to 69. 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 knowledge, where it averages 60.4 against 51.7. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HLE, 46% to 34.7%. Inkling does hit back in mathematics, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Qwen3.7 Plus is the reasoning model in the pair, while Inkling is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use.
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 | Inkling | Δ | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Inkling51.7 | Margin→ 8.7 | Qwen3.7 Plus60.4 |
| Coding | Inkling68.6 | Margin→ 7.0 | Qwen3.7 Plus75.6 |
| Multimodal | Inkling76.5 | Margin→ 5.0 | Qwen3.7 Plus81.5 |
| Inst. Following | Inkling79.8 | Margin→ 4.7 | Qwen3.7 Plus84.5 |
| Math | Inkling97.1 | Margin← 4.2 | Qwen3.7 Plus92.9 |
| Agentic | Inkling69.4 | Margin→ 2.3 | Qwen3.7 Plus71.7 |
| Reasoning | InklingNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Plus91.7 |
| Multilingual | InklingNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Plus85.4 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
HLE
KnowledgeA 46%B 34.7%Winner: InklingΔ 11.3HLE: Inkling scored 46%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 34.7%. Inkling wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 63.8%B 70.3%Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 6.5Terminal-Bench 2.0: Inkling scored 63.8%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 70.3%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMMU-Pro
MultimodalA 73.5%B 79%Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 5.5MMMU-Pro: Inkling scored 73.5%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 79%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
CharXiv
MultimodalA 82%B 85.9%Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 3.9CharXiv: Inkling scored 82%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 85.9%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 54.3%B 57.6%Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 3.3SWE-bench Pro: Inkling scored 54.3%; 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 | Inkling | Qwen3.7 Plus | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Inkling$1.87 input / $4.68 output | Qwen3.7 PlusNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | InklingNot available | Qwen3.7 PlusNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | InklingNot available | Qwen3.7 PlusNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Inkling1M | Qwen3.7 Plus1M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticQwen3.7 Plus wins18 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Inkling | Qwen3.7 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 63.8% | 70.3% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| BrowseCompSource | 77.1% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 74.1% | 73.2% | Inkling leads |
| Design Arena Agentic Web DevSource | 1258 | — | Not comparable |
| QwenClawBenchSource | — | 61.8% | Not comparable |
| QwenWebBenchSource | — | 1536 | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 62.7% | Not comparable |
| BFCL v4Source | — | 72.9% | Not comparable |
| VITA-BenchSource | — | 45.6% | Not comparable |
| DeepPlanningSource | — | 62.3% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 73.3% | Not comparable |
| AndroidWorldSource | — | 81.0% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 20.8% | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 22.4% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 93% | 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 | Inkling | Qwen3.7 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 77.6% | 77.7% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 54.3% | 57.6% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 63.8% | 70.3% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| 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 |
| Terminal-Bench HardSource | — | 47.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | — | 45.5% | Not comparable |
Reasoning3 benchmarks
KnowledgeQwen3.7 Plus wins14 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Inkling | Qwen3.7 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 87.9% | 90.3% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| GPQA-DSource | 87.9% | 90.3% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| HLESource | 46% | 34.7% | Inkling leads |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 30% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 88.5% | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ReduxSource | — | 94.5% | Not comparable |
| SuperGPQASource | — | 71.4% | Not comparable |
| MMMLUSource | — | 89.0% | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 39.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 90.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 33.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | 2.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 22.2% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 25.5% | Not comparable |
MathInkling wins4 benchmarks
Multilingual5 benchmarks
MultimodalQwen3.7 Plus wins18 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Inkling | Qwen3.7 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | 73.5% | 79% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| CharXivSource | 82% | 85.9% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| CharXiv w/o toolsSource | 78.1% | — | Not comparable |
| MathVisionSource | — | 90.3% | 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 |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | — | 80.5% | Not comparable |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | — | 1300 | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (7)
Which is better, Inkling or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 77 to 69. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HLE, where the scores are 46% and 34.7%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Inkling or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 60.4 versus 51.7. Inside this category, HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Inkling or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 75.6 versus 68.6. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, Inkling or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Inkling has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 97.1 versus 92.9. Qwen3.7 Plus stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Inkling or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 71.7 versus 69.4. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Inkling or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.5 versus 76.5. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for instruction following, Inkling or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 84.5 versus 79.8. Inside this category, IFBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
The AI models change fast. We track them for you.
A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.