Skip to main content

Model comparison

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 26 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

60.56/100
Margin
6.7pts
winning →
67.22/100
2 category wins5 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Qwen3.5-122B-A10B #47 (Supported); Qwen3.7 Plus #21 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Qwen3.5-122B-A10B and Qwen3.7 Plus share 26 comparable benchmark results. 7 of 8 categories are comparable. 5 results are unique to Qwen3.5-122B-A10B; 43 to Qwen3.7 Plus.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
26
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B only
5
Qwen3.7 Plus only
43
Comparable categories
7 / 8

Pick Qwen3.7 Plus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.5-122B-A10B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 26 shared benchmark results across 7 evidence categories; 7 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 BenchAlign aggregate, 67.22 to 60.56. 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 reasoning, where it averages 91.7 against 60.2. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 49.4% to 70.3%. Qwen3.5-122B-A10B does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

Qwen3.7 Plus gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 262K for Qwen3.5-122B-A10B.

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 Qwen3.5-122B-A10B and Qwen3.7 Plus
CategoryQwen3.5-122B-A10BΔQwen3.7 Plus
ReasoningQwen3.5-122B-A10B60.2Margin 31.5Qwen3.7 Plus91.7
KnowledgeQwen3.5-122B-A10B83.6Margin 23.5Qwen3.7 Plus60.1
AgenticQwen3.5-122B-A10B56.4Margin 15.3Qwen3.7 Plus71.7
Inst. FollowingQwen3.5-122B-A10B93.4Margin 8.9Qwen3.7 Plus84.5
MultimodalQwen3.5-122B-A10B77.2Margin 4.3Qwen3.7 Plus81.5
CodingQwen3.5-122B-A10B72.0Margin 3.6Qwen3.7 Plus75.6
MultilingualQwen3.5-122B-A10B82.2Margin 3.2Qwen3.7 Plus85.4
MathQwen3.5-122B-A10BNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Plus92.9

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · Qwen3.5-122B-A10BB · Qwen3.7 Plus
  1. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 49.4%B 70.3%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 20.9
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Qwen3.5-122B-A10B scored 49.4%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 70.3%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark.
  2. OSWorld-Verified

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 58%B 73.3%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 15.3
    OSWorld-Verified: Qwen3.5-122B-A10B scored 58%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 73.3%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark.
  3. CharXiv

    Multimodal
    Source ↗
    A 77.2%B 85.9%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 8.7
    CharXiv: Qwen3.5-122B-A10B scored 77.2%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 85.9%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark.
  4. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 72%B 77.7%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 5.7
    SWE-bench Verified: Qwen3.5-122B-A10B scored 72%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 77.7%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark.
  5. SuperGPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 67.1%B 71.4%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 4.3
    SuperGPQA: Qwen3.5-122B-A10B scored 67.1%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 71.4%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricQwen3.5-122B-A10BQwen3.7 PlusComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensQwen3.5-122B-A10B$0 input / $0 outputQwen3.7 PlusNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondQwen3.5-122B-A10BNot availableQwen3.7 PlusNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenQwen3.5-122B-A10BNot availableQwen3.7 PlusNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensQwen3.5-122B-A10B262KQwen3.7 Plus1MQwen3.7 Plus lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkQwen3.5-122B-A10BQwen3.7 PlusResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 49.4%70.3%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
BrowseCompSource 63.8%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 58%73.3%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
τ²-bench resultsSource 93.6%93%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B leads
AA Agentic IndexSource 20.7%20.8%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
GDPval-AASource 23.9%21.8%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B leads
GDPval-AASource 978936Qwen3.5-122B-A10B leads
QwenClawBenchSource 61.8%Not comparable
QwenWebBenchSource 1536Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 62.7%Not comparable
BFCL v4Source 72.9%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 73.2%Not comparable
VITA-BenchSource 45.6%Not comparable
DeepPlanningSource 62.3%Not comparable
AndroidWorldSource 81.0%Not comparable
APEX-Agents-AASource 22.4%Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source 2.8%Not comparable
CodingQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkQwen3.5-122B-A10BQwen3.7 PlusResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 72%77.7%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA Coding IndexSource 45.7%55.9%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-SciCodeSource 42.0%45.5%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 70.3%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 57.6%Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource 75.8%Not comparable
NL2RepoSource 41.1%Not comparable
SciCodeSource 51.3%Not comparable
LiveCodeBenchSource 89.6%Not comparable
ReasoningQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkQwen3.5-122B-A10BQwen3.7 PlusResult
LongBench v2Source 60.2%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 66.7%65.0%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B leads
CritPtSource 0.6%9.1%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
MRCRv2Source 91.7%Not comparable
KnowledgeQwen3.5-122B-A10B wins
BenchmarkQwen3.5-122B-A10BQwen3.7 PlusResult
MMLU-ProSource 86.7%88.5%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
SuperGPQASource 67.1%71.4%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
GPQASource 86.6%90.3%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 32.3%39.0%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 85.7%90.0%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-HLESource 23.4%33.4%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -39.6%2.4%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 24.7%22.2%Qwen3.5-122B-A10B leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 85.5%25.5%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
GPQA-DSource 90.3%Not comparable
HLESource 34.7%Not comparable
MMLU-ReduxSource 94.5%Not comparable
MMMLUSource 89.0%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkQwen3.5-122B-A10BQwen3.7 PlusResult
HMMT Feb 2026Source 92.9%Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource 86.0%Not comparable
ApexSource 22.7%Not comparable
MultilingualQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkQwen3.5-122B-A10BQwen3.7 PlusResult
MMLU-ProXSource 82.2%85.4%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
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
BenchmarkQwen3.5-122B-A10BQwen3.7 PlusResult
MMMUSource 83.9%Not comparable
MMVUSource 74.7%Not comparable
MathVisionSource 86.2%90.3%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
CharXivSource 77.2%85.9%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
V*Source 93.2%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 75.0%80.5%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
MMMU-ProSource 79%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
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1288Not comparable
Inst. FollowingQwen3.5-122B-A10B wins
BenchmarkQwen3.5-122B-A10BQwen3.7 PlusResult
IFEvalSource 93.4%94.6%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-IFBenchSource 75.7%78.0%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
IFBenchSource 79.1%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (8)

Which is better, Qwen3.5-122B-A10B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 67.22 to 60.56. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 49.4% and 70.3%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Qwen3.5-122B-A10B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 83.6 versus 60.1. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, Qwen3.5-122B-A10B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 75.6 versus 72. Inside this category, AA Coding Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for reasoning, Qwen3.5-122B-A10B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 91.7 versus 60.2. Inside this category, CritPt is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Qwen3.5-122B-A10B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 71.7 versus 56.4. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Qwen3.5-122B-A10B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.5 versus 77.2. Inside this category, CharXiv is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for instruction following, Qwen3.5-122B-A10B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.5-122B-A10B has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 93.4 versus 84.5. Inside this category, AA-IFBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multilingual tasks, Qwen3.5-122B-A10B or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for multilingual tasks in this comparison, averaging 85.4 versus 82.2. Inside this category, MMLU-ProX 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.