Skip to main content

Model comparison

Ornith-1.0-35B vs SWE-1.7

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 3 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

DeepReinforce AI
N/A
No comparison
Cognition
N/A
0 category wins1 category wins

Evidence parity. Ornith-1.0-35B and SWE-1.7 share 3 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 4 results are unique to Ornith-1.0-35B; 1 to SWE-1.7.

Updated July 18, 2026
Shared results
3
Ornith-1.0-35B only
4
SWE-1.7 only
1
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Treat this as a split decision. Ornith-1.0-35B makes more sense if its workflow fits your team better; SWE-1.7 is the better fit if agentic is the priority.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 3 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Ornith-1.0-35B and SWE-1.7 finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.

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 Ornith-1.0-35B and SWE-1.7
CategoryOrnith-1.0-35BΔSWE-1.7
AgenticOrnith-1.0-35B64.2Margin 17.3SWE-1.781.5
CodingOrnith-1.0-35B65.9MarginNo overlapSWE-1.7Not measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · Ornith-1.0-35BB · SWE-1.7
  1. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 64.2%B 81.5%
    Winner: SWE-1.7Δ 17.3
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Ornith-1.0-35B scored 64.2%; SWE-1.7 scored 81.5%. SWE-1.7 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricOrnith-1.0-35BSWE-1.7Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensOrnith-1.0-35B$0 input / $0 outputSWE-1.7Not availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondOrnith-1.0-35BNot availableSWE-1.7Not availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenOrnith-1.0-35BNot availableSWE-1.7Not availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensOrnith-1.0-35B256KSWE-1.7256KListed context windows are equal.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticSWE-1.7 wins
BenchmarkOrnith-1.0-35BSWE-1.7Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 64.2%81.5%SWE-1.7 leads
Claw-EvalSource 69.8%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkOrnith-1.0-35BSWE-1.7Result
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 75.6%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 50.4%Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource 69.3%77.8%SWE-1.7 leads
NL2RepoSource 34.6%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 64.2%81.5%SWE-1.7 leads
FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource 42.3%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Ornith-1.0-35B or SWE-1.7?

Ornith-1.0-35B and SWE-1.7 are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Ornith-1.0-35B or SWE-1.7?

SWE-1.7 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.5 versus 64.2. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 18, 2026

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.