Model A

OpenBMB

—

Evidence status unavailable

90% interval unavailable

MiniCPM5-1B vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Updated September 14, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.

Model B

Qwen3.7 Plus

Alibaba

61.64/100

Supported · Public rank #54

90% interval 50.8–72.5

Decision reading

At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner.

8 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Share or export

Share on X LinkedInSocial card CSV JSON

Which one for your work

Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.

Long documents
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
Qwen3.7 Plus
Qwen3.7 Plus has the larger documented context window.
Confidence: documented

Show secondary and unsupported calls

Coding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Not enough matched evidence
MiniCPM5-1B is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.
Confidence: limited
Agentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
MiniCPM5-1B is scored on Estimated evidence for agentic, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.
Confidence: limited
Chat turn cost
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates
Cache-heavy agent loop cost
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
The page does not recommend a cost winner because at least one model cannot fit the stated workload in one request. MiniCPM5-1B does not fit this workload in one request. MiniCPM5-1B has no comparable published API token rate. Qwen3.7 Plus has no comparable published API token rate.
Confidence: listed-rates
Repository review cost
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates

What is actually comparable

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.

6 MiniCPM5-1B only

8 Shared

44 Qwen3.7 Plus only

Shared results: 8
MiniCPM5-1B only: 6
Qwen3.7 Plus only: 44
Like-for-like categories: 1 / 8

2 categories rest on Estimated evidence or different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign lane for agentic, coding, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.

Instruction following

Like-for-like

MiniCPM5-1B: 24.8; #121/123
Qwen3.7 Plus: 91.1; #17/123
Basis: Provisional lane · 1 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading: Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Agentic

Directional only

MiniCPM5-1B: 43.3; Estimated · #98/153
Qwen3.7 Plus: 37.3; Supported · #127/153
Basis: BenchAlign lane · 1 vs 11 public rows
Reading: Directional only

Knowledge

Directional only

MiniCPM5-1B: 36.9; Estimated · #148/183
Qwen3.7 Plus: 56.2; Estimated · #49/183
Basis: BenchAlign lane · 4 vs 7 public rows
Reading: Directional only

Coding

Not comparable

MiniCPM5-1B: Not ranked
Qwen3.7 Plus: 52.6; Estimated · #46/152
Basis: BenchAlign lane · 2 vs 7 public rows
Reading: Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable

MiniCPM5-1B: Not ranked
Qwen3.7 Plus: 74.0; Unranked · 3 rankable rows
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Math

Not comparable

MiniCPM5-1B: 5.4; Unranked · 4 rankable rows
Qwen3.7 Plus: 78.3; Unranked · 3 rankable rows
Basis: Provisional lane · 2 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable

MiniCPM5-1B: Not ranked
Qwen3.7 Plus: 78.9; #3/12
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable

MiniCPM5-1B: Not ranked
Qwen3.7 Plus: 72.5; #18/48
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Category scores with the server-provided evidence basis for MiniCPM5-1B and Qwen3.7 Plus
Category	MiniCPM5-1B	Qwen3.7 Plus	Basis	Reading
Instruction following	24.8#121/123	91.1#17/123	Like-for-likeProvisional lane · 1 vs 1 weighted rows	Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Agentic	43.3Estimated · #98/153	37.3Supported · #127/153	Directional onlyBenchAlign lane · 1 vs 11 public rows	Directional only
Knowledge	36.9Estimated · #148/183	56.2Estimated · #49/183	Directional onlyBenchAlign lane · 4 vs 7 public rows	Directional only
Coding	Not ranked	52.6Estimated · #46/152	Not comparableBenchAlign lane · 2 vs 7 public rows	Not comparable
Reasoning	Not ranked	74.0Unranked · 3 rankable rows	Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows	Not comparable
Math	5.4Unranked · 4 rankable rows	78.3Unranked · 3 rankable rows	Not comparableProvisional lane · 2 vs 1 weighted rows	Not comparable
Multilingual	Not ranked	78.9#3/12	Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows	Not comparable
Multimodal	Not ranked	72.5#18/48	Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows	Not comparable

Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.

Shape of the matched evidence

Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.

Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.

HMMT Feb 2026
Math
MiniCPM5-1B: 25.8%Qwen3.7 Plus: 92.9%Normalized gap 67.1MiniCPM5-1B source Qwen3.7 Plus source
SuperGPQA
Knowledge
MiniCPM5-1B: 23.1%Qwen3.7 Plus: 71.4%Normalized gap 48.3MiniCPM5-1B source Qwen3.7 Plus source
MMLU-Pro
Knowledge
MiniCPM5-1B: 48.9%Qwen3.7 Plus: 88.5%Normalized gap 39.6MiniCPM5-1B source Qwen3.7 Plus source
IFBench
Instruction following
MiniCPM5-1B: 46.7%Qwen3.7 Plus: 79.1%Normalized gap 32.4MiniCPM5-1B source Qwen3.7 Plus source

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.

Chat turn

1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

MiniCPM5-1B: API rate not published; Fits in one request
Qwen3.7 Plus: API rate not published; Fits in one request

MiniCPM5-1B has no comparable published API token rate. Qwen3.7 Plus has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

MiniCPM5-1B: API rate not published; Fits in one request
Qwen3.7 Plus: API rate not published; Fits in one request

MiniCPM5-1B has no comparable published API token rate. Qwen3.7 Plus has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

MiniCPM5-1B: API rate not published; Does not fit in one request; Cached-input rate unavailable
Qwen3.7 Plus: API rate not published; Fits in one request; Cached-input rate unavailable

MiniCPM5-1B does not fit this workload in one request. MiniCPM5-1B has no comparable published API token rate. Qwen3.7 Plus has no comparable published API token rate.

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

SpecificationMiniCPM5-1BQwen3.7 Plus

Context window

Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.

MiniCPM5-1B

131K

Qwen3.7 Plus

API model ID

MiniCPM5-1B

Not sourced

Qwen3.7 Plus

Not sourced

Cached-input rate

A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.

MiniCPM5-1B

No comparable hosted API rate

Qwen3.7 Plus

No comparable hosted API rate

Documented inputs

MiniCPM5-1B

Not sourced

Qwen3.7 Plus

Not sourced

Documented outputs

MiniCPM5-1B

Not sourced

Qwen3.7 Plus

Not sourced

Provider availability

MiniCPM5-1B

Not sourced

Qwen3.7 Plus

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

MiniCPM5-1B

Reasoning

Qwen3.7 Plus

Reasoning

Weight access

MiniCPM5-1B

Open Weight

Qwen3.7 Plus

Proprietary

License

MiniCPM5-1B

Open Weight

Qwen3.7 Plus

Proprietary

Release date

MiniCPM5-1B

2026-05-25

Qwen3.7 Plus

2026-06-03

If you already use one of these models

Deployment change: The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
Quality signal: At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner.
Workload cost: A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff: Qwen3.7 Plus has the larger documented window (1M).

Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Benchmark evidence

The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.

Browse raw public benchmark evidence58 rows

Agentic

BFCL v4
MiniCPM5-1B25.1%
Source
Qwen3.7 Plus72.9%
Source
Qwen3.7 Plus leads this result
Terminal-Bench 2.0
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus70.3%
Source
Not directly comparable
QwenClawBench
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus61.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
Claw-Eval
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus62.7%
Source
Not directly comparable
MCP Atlas
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus73.2%
Source
Not directly comparable
VITA-Bench
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus45.6%
Source
Not directly comparable
DeepPlanning
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus62.3%
Source
Not directly comparable
OSWorld-Verified
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus73.3%
Source
Not directly comparable
AndroidWorld
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus81.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
OSWorld 2.0
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus2.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus52.8%
Source
Not directly comparable

Coding

LiveCodeBench Pro
MiniCPM5-1B22.7%
Source
Qwen3.7 Plus—
Not directly comparable
LiveCodeBench v6
MiniCPM5-1B33.5%
Source
Qwen3.7 Plus—
Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus70.3%
Source
Not directly comparable
SWE-bench Verified
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus77.7%
Source
Not directly comparable
SWE-bench Pro
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus57.6%
Source
Not directly comparable
SWE Multilingual
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus75.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
NL2Repo
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus41.1%
Source
Not directly comparable
SciCode
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus51.3%
Source
Not directly comparable
LiveCodeBench
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus89.6%
Source
Not directly comparable

Reasoning

BBH
MiniCPM5-1B71.9%
Source
Qwen3.7 Plus—
Not directly comparable
CritPt
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus9.1%
Source
Not directly comparable
MRCRv2
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus91.7%
Source
Not directly comparable

Knowledge

MMLU-Pro
MiniCPM5-1B48.9%
Source
Qwen3.7 Plus88.5%
Source
Qwen3.7 Plus leads this result
MMLU-Redux
MiniCPM5-1B70.1%
Source
Qwen3.7 Plus94.5%
Source
Qwen3.7 Plus leads this result
GPQA-D
MiniCPM5-1B26.3%
Source
Qwen3.7 Plus90.3%
Source
Qwen3.7 Plus leads this result
SuperGPQA
MiniCPM5-1B23.1%
Source
Qwen3.7 Plus71.4%
Source
Qwen3.7 Plus leads this result
GPQA
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus90.3%
Source
Not directly comparable
HLE
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus34.7%
Source
Not directly comparable
MMMLU
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus89.0%
Source
Not directly comparable

Math

AIME 2025
MiniCPM5-1B40.4%
Source
Qwen3.7 Plus—
Not directly comparable
AIME26
MiniCPM5-1B40.4%
Source
Qwen3.7 Plus—
Not directly comparable
HMMT Feb 2026
MiniCPM5-1B25.8%
Source
Qwen3.7 Plus92.9%
Source
Qwen3.7 Plus leads this result
MATH-500
MiniCPM5-1B91.6%
Source
Qwen3.7 Plus—
Not directly comparable
IMOAnswerBench
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus86.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
Apex
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus22.7%
Source
Not directly comparable

Multilingual

MMLU-ProX
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus85.4%
Source
Not directly comparable
NOVA-63
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus58.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
INCLUDE
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus83.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
MAXIFE
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus88.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
PolyMath
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus84.0%
Source
Not directly comparable

Multimodal

MMMU-Pro
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus79%
Source
Not directly comparable
MathVision
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus90.3%
Source
Not directly comparable
CharXiv
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus85.9%
Source
Not directly comparable
ERQA
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus69.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
MedXpertQA (MM)
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus71.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
ScreenSpot Pro
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus79.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
SimpleVQA
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus81.7%
Source
Not directly comparable
MMSearch-Plus
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus41.4%
Source
Not directly comparable
RealWorldQA
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus86.9%
Source
Not directly comparable
OmniDocBench 1.5
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus91.4%
Source
Not directly comparable
OCRBench V2
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus70.7%
Source
Not directly comparable
ODINW13
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus51.1%
Source
Not directly comparable
Video-MME (with subtitle)
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus88.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
VideoMMMU
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus85.4%
Source
Not directly comparable
MLVU (M-Avg)
MiniCPM5-1B—
Qwen3.7 Plus87.4%
Source
Not directly comparable

Instruction following

IFBench
MiniCPM5-1B46.7%
Source
Qwen3.7 Plus79.1%
Source
Qwen3.7 Plus leads this result
IFEval
MiniCPM5-1B80.4%
Source
Qwen3.7 Plus94.6%
Source
Qwen3.7 Plus leads this result

Frequently asked questions

Which is better, MiniCPM5-1B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.

Which is better for coding, MiniCPM5-1B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

MiniCPM5-1B is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

Which is better for agentic tasks, MiniCPM5-1B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

MiniCPM5-1B scores higher for agentic tasks on the public lane, 43.3 to 37.3. MiniCPM5-1B is scored on Estimated evidence for agentic tasks, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for agentic tasks from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.

Which costs less, MiniCPM5-1B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.

Which has the larger context window, MiniCPM5-1B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the larger documented context window: 1M, compared with 131K.

Related comparisons

Compare API pricing Read the methodology Open the model selector

Last updated September 14, 2026

Watch MiniCPM5-1B vs Qwen3.7 Plus

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.

MiniCPM5-1B vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Which one for your work

Long documents

Coding work

Agentic work

Chat turn cost

Cache-heavy agent loop cost

Repository review cost

What is actually comparable

Category results, on a stated basis

Instruction following

Agentic

Knowledge

Coding

Reasoning

Math

Multilingual

Multimodal

Shape of the matched evidence

What each workload costs

Chat turn

Repository review

Cache-heavy agent loop

Specification differences

Context window

API model ID

Cached-input rate

Documented inputs

Documented outputs

Provider availability

Reasoning profile

Weight access

License

Release date

Benchmark evidence

Agentic

Coding

Reasoning

Knowledge

Math

Multilingual

Multimodal

Instruction following

Frequently asked questions

Which is better, MiniCPM5-1B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Which is better for coding, MiniCPM5-1B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Which is better for agentic tasks, MiniCPM5-1B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Which costs less, MiniCPM5-1B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Which has the larger context window, MiniCPM5-1B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Related comparisons

Watch MiniCPM5-1B vs Qwen3.7 Plus