Model comparison
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) vs Qwen3.7 Plus
Head-to-head evidence from 19 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) #53 (Supported); Qwen3.7 Plus #21 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) and Qwen3.7 Plus share 19 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 2 results are unique to Qwen 3.6 Max (preview); 50 to Qwen3.7 Plus.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 19
- Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) only
- 2
- Qwen3.7 Plus only
- 50
- Comparable categories
- 4 / 8
Pick Qwen3.7 Plus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 19 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 4 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 59.72. 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 mathematics, where it averages 92.9 against 18.4. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 65.4% to 70.3%. Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) 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 256K for Qwen 3.6 Max (preview).
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 | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) | Δ | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)18.4 | Margin→ 74.5 | Qwen3.7 Plus92.9 |
| Coding | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)51.0 | Margin→ 24.6 | Qwen3.7 Plus75.6 |
| Knowledge | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)73.9 | Margin← 13.8 | Qwen3.7 Plus60.1 |
| Agentic | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)65.4 | Margin→ 6.3 | Qwen3.7 Plus71.7 |
| Reasoning | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Plus91.7 |
| Multilingual | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Plus85.4 |
| Multimodal | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Plus81.5 |
| Inst. Following | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Plus84.5 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 65.4%B 70.3%Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 4.9Terminal-Bench 2.0: Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) scored 65.4%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 70.3%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SciCode
CodingA 47%B 51.3%Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 4.3SciCode: Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) scored 47%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 51.3%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SuperGPQA
KnowledgeA 73.9%B 71.4%Winner: Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Δ 2.5SuperGPQA: Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) scored 73.9%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 71.4%. Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 57.3%B 57.6%Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 0.3SWE-bench Pro: Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) scored 57.3%; 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 | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) | Qwen3.7 Plus | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not available | Qwen3.7 PlusNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not available | Qwen3.7 PlusNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not available | Qwen3.7 PlusNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)256K | Qwen3.7 Plus1M | Qwen3.7 Plus lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticQwen3.7 Plus wins16 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) | Qwen3.7 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 65.4% | 70.3% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| QwenClawBenchSource | 59.0% | 61.8% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| QwenWebBenchSource | 1532 | 1536 | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 95.9% | 93% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| 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 |
| 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 |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 21.8% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 936 | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | — | 2.8% | Not comparable |
CodingQwen3.7 Plus wins9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) | Qwen3.7 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench ProSource | 57.3% | 57.6% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| SciCodeSource | 47% | 51.3% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| NL2RepoSource | 42.9% | 41.1% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 65.4% | 70.3% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 46.9% | 45.5% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 77.7% | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | — | 75.8% | Not comparable |
| LiveCodeBenchSource | — | 89.6% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 55.9% | Not comparable |
Reasoning3 benchmarks
KnowledgeQwen 3.6 Max (preview) wins13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) | Qwen3.7 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SuperGPQASource | 73.9% | 71.4% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 40.0% | 39.0% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 88.8% | 90.0% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| AA-HLESource | 28.9% | 33.4% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 10.2% | 2.4% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 37.7% | 22.2% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 44.2% | 25.5% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| GPQASource | — | 90.3% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 90.3% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 34.7% | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 88.5% | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ReduxSource | — | 94.5% | Not comparable |
| MMMLUSource | — | 89.0% | Not comparable |
MathQwen3.7 Plus wins5 benchmarks
Multilingual5 benchmarks
Multimodal17 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) | Qwen3.7 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | — | 79% | Not comparable |
| MathVisionSource | — | 90.3% | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | — | 85.9% | 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 | — | 1288 | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (5)
Which is better, Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 67.22 to 59.72. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 65.4% and 70.3%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 73.9 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, Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 75.6 versus 51. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 92.9 versus 18.4. Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 71.7 versus 65.4. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
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.