Coding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Not enough matched evidence
Qwen3.7 Plus and Spark-X2.6-4B are scored on Estimated evidence for coding, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.
Confidence: limited
Qwen3.7 Plus vs Spark-X2.6-4B
Updated October 20, 2026. Rank says Qwen3.7 Plus is ahead. Price, access, and your workload can each overturn that. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.
Share or export
Decision reading
Qwen3.7 Plus has the higher public point estimate, 53.74 versus 40.14. Their conditional score ranges overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence. 13 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.
- Shared results
- 13
- Qwen3.7 Plus only
- 40
- Spark-X2.6-4B only
- 7
- Like-for-like categories
- 1 / 8
Supported: Qwen3.7 Plus · Estimated: Spark-X2.6-4B. Conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.How the comparison works
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.
No workload recommendation clears the current evidence threshold.
Use the matched evidence, workload costs, and sourced specifications below instead of treating a point score as a universal answer.
Show secondary and unsupported calls
Agentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
Spark-X2.6-4B is scored on Estimated evidence for agentic, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.
Confidence: limitedLong documents
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
No clear pick
The documented context windows are equal.
Confidence: documentedChat 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-ratesCache-heavy agent loop cost
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-ratesRepository 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
Which one for a specific job
Choose a job from the LLM Selector's task catalog to see the category row it rests on, under the same basis rules as the table below. A directional row stays directional; choosing a job never creates a winner.
The same task catalog as the LLM Selector. Each job names the evidence surface it rests on; nothing here adds a new score.
40.3Qwen3.7 Plus30.6Spark-X2.6-4B
Directional only · BenchAlign v5.8
Qwen3.7 Plus has the higher coding point estimate. Conditional score ranges do not establish rank confidence.
Coding scores combine specific tasks and setups. Match the editor, harness, and effort to your workflow.
Same basis rules as the category table below
What is actually comparable
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.
40 Qwen3.7 Plus only
13 Shared
7 Spark-X2.6-4B only
3 categories rest on Estimated evidence or different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.
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.
GPQAKnowledge
Normalized gap 20.4Qwen3.7 Plus:90.3%Spark-X2.6-4B:69.9%SWE-bench VerifiedCoding
Normalized gap 14.9Qwen3.7 Plus:77.7%Spark-X2.6-4B:62.8%SciCodeCoding
Normalized gap 14.5Qwen3.7 Plus:51.3%Spark-X2.6-4B:36.8%HMMT Feb 2026Math
Normalized gap 11.6Qwen3.7 Plus:92.9%Spark-X2.6-4B:81.3%SWE MultilingualCoding
Normalized gap 11.1Qwen3.7 Plus:75.8%Spark-X2.6-4B:64.7%
Bars run 0–100 on each benchmark’s normalized display scale
Category results, on a stated basis
Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign v5.8 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- Qwen3.7 Plus
- 92.8
- #17/149
- Spark-X2.6-4B
- 78.2
- #62/149
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 1 vs 1 weighted rows
- Reading
- Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Agentic
Directional only- Qwen3.7 Plus
- 35.1
- Supported · #83/131
- Spark-X2.6-4B
- 33.0
- Estimated · #89/131
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 11 vs 7 public rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Coding
Directional only- Qwen3.7 Plus
- 40.3
- Estimated · #66/152
- Spark-X2.6-4B
- 30.6
- Estimated · #95/152
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 7 vs 4 public rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Knowledge
Directional only- Qwen3.7 Plus
- 53.7
- Estimated · #67/187
- Spark-X2.6-4B
- 43.0
- Estimated · #109/187
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 7 vs 3 public rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Reasoning
Not comparable- Qwen3.7 Plus
- 80.0
- Unranked · 3 rankable rows
- Spark-X2.6-4B
- 48.8
- Unranked · 2 rankable rows
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 1 vs 1 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multimodal
Not comparable- Qwen3.7 Plus
- 82.0
- #16/55
- Spark-X2.6-4B
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 2 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multilingual
Not comparable- Qwen3.7 Plus
- 95.7
- #3/17
- Spark-X2.6-4B
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Math
Not comparable- Qwen3.7 Plus
- 64.3
- Unranked · 4 rankable rows
- Spark-X2.6-4B
- 76.4
- Unranked · 3 rankable rows
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 2 vs 2 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
| Category | Qwen3.7 Plus | Spark-X2.6-4B | Basis | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Instruction following | 92.8#17/149 | 78.2#62/149 | Like-for-likeProvisional lane · 1 vs 1 weighted rows | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| Agentic | 35.1Supported · #83/131 | 33.0Estimated · #89/131 | Directional onlyBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 11 vs 7 public rows | Directional only |
| Coding | 40.3Estimated · #66/152 | 30.6Estimated · #95/152 | Directional onlyBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 7 vs 4 public rows | Directional only |
| Knowledge | 53.7Estimated · #67/187 | 43.0Estimated · #109/187 | Directional onlyBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 7 vs 3 public rows | Directional only |
| Reasoning | 80.0Unranked · 3 rankable rows | 48.8Unranked · 2 rankable rows | Not comparableProvisional lane · 1 vs 1 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Multimodal | 82.0#16/55 | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 2 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Multilingual | 95.7#3/17 | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Math | 64.3Unranked · 4 rankable rows | 76.4Unranked · 3 rankable rows | Not comparableProvisional lane · 2 vs 2 weighted rows | Not comparable |
Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign v5.8) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the provisional lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.
Supported evidence per lane · bars run 0–100Methodology
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
- Qwen3.7 Plus
- API rate not published
- Fits in one request
- Spark-X2.6-4B
- Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
- Fits in one request
Qwen3.7 Plus has no comparable published API token rate. Spark-X2.6-4B has no comparable published API token rate.
Repository review
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
- Qwen3.7 Plus
- API rate not published
- Fits in one request
- Spark-X2.6-4B
- Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
- Fits in one request
Qwen3.7 Plus has no comparable published API token rate. Spark-X2.6-4B has no comparable published API token rate.
Cache-heavy agent loop
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
- Qwen3.7 Plus
- API rate not published
- Fits in one request
- Cached-input rate unavailable
- Spark-X2.6-4B
- Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
- Fits in one request
- Cached-input rate unavailable
Qwen3.7 Plus has no comparable published API token rate. Spark-X2.6-4B has no comparable published API token rate.
Cached input falls back to the list input rate only where a cached rate is unpublished
Specification differences
Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.
SpecificationQwen3.7 PlusSpark-X2.6-4B
Context window
Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.
Qwen3.7 Plus
1M
Spark-X2.6-4B
API model ID
Qwen3.7 Plus
Not sourced
Spark-X2.6-4B
Not sourced
Cached-input rate
A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.
Qwen3.7 Plus
No comparable hosted API rate
Spark-X2.6-4B
No comparable hosted API rate
SparkLLM Spark-X2.6-4B model cardDocumented inputs
Qwen3.7 Plus
Not sourced
Spark-X2.6-4B
Documented outputs
Qwen3.7 Plus
Not sourced
Spark-X2.6-4B
Provider availability
Qwen3.7 Plus
Not sourced
Spark-X2.6-4B
Open Weights · Hugging Face, self-hosted inference
SparkLLM Spark-X2.6-4B model cardReasoning profile
Qwen3.7 Plus
Reasoning
Spark-X2.6-4B
Reasoning
Weight access
Qwen3.7 Plus
Proprietary
Spark-X2.6-4B
Open Weight
License
Qwen3.7 Plus
Proprietary
Spark-X2.6-4B
Open Weight
Release date
Qwen3.7 Plus
2026-06-03
Spark-X2.6-4B
2026-10-19
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
- Qwen3.7 Plus has the higher public point estimate, 53.74 versus 40.14. Their conditional score ranges overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence.
- Workload cost
- A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
- Context tradeoff
- Both models list 1M.
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.
Questions
Which is better, Qwen3.7 Plus or Spark-X2.6-4B?
Qwen3.7 Plus has the higher public point estimate, 53.74 versus 40.14. Their conditional score ranges overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.
Which is better for coding, Qwen3.7 Plus or Spark-X2.6-4B?
Qwen3.7 Plus scores higher for coding on the public lane, 40.3 to 30.6. Qwen3.7 Plus and Spark-X2.6-4B are scored on Estimated evidence for coding, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for coding from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Qwen3.7 Plus or Spark-X2.6-4B?
Qwen3.7 Plus scores higher for agentic tasks on the public lane, 35.1 to 33. Spark-X2.6-4B 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, Qwen3.7 Plus or Spark-X2.6-4B?
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, Qwen3.7 Plus or Spark-X2.6-4B?
Both models list the same context window, 1M.
Self-host vs API cost
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
Qwen3.7 Plus
API / mo$0
Self-host / moNot listed
Break-even—
Proprietary model — self-hosting not applicable.
Spark-X2.6-4B
API / mo$0
Self-host / mo$298
Break-even—
Benchmark evidence
The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.
Browse raw public benchmark evidence60 rows
Agentic
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Qwen3.7 Plus70.3%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
QwenClawBench
Qwen3.7 Plus61.8%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
Claw-Eval
Qwen3.7 Plus62.7%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B69.9%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B leads this result
BFCL v4
Qwen3.7 Plus72.9%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B71.8%SourceQwen3.7 Plus leads this result
MCP Atlas
Qwen3.7 Plus73.2%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B62.4%SourceQwen3.7 Plus leads this result
VITA-Bench
Qwen3.7 Plus45.6%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
DeepPlanning
Qwen3.7 Plus62.3%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
OSWorld-Verified
Qwen3.7 Plus73.3%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
AndroidWorld
Qwen3.7 Plus81.0%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
OSWorld 2.0
Qwen3.7 Plus2.8%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)
Qwen3.7 Plus52.8%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
τ²-bench results
Qwen3.7 Plus—Spark-X2.6-4B86.9%SourceNot directly comparable
BrowseComp
Qwen3.7 Plus—Spark-X2.6-4B53.1%SourceNot directly comparable
HLE w/ tools
Qwen3.7 Plus—Spark-X2.6-4B36.9%SourceNot directly comparable
τ³-bench results
Qwen3.7 Plus—Spark-X2.6-4B34.7%SourceNot directly comparable
Coding
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Qwen3.7 Plus70.3%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
SWE-bench Verified
Qwen3.7 Plus77.7%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B62.8%SourceQwen3.7 Plus leads this result
SWE-bench Pro
Qwen3.7 Plus57.6%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B54.3%SourceQwen3.7 Plus leads this result
SWE Multilingual
Qwen3.7 Plus75.8%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B64.7%SourceQwen3.7 Plus leads this result
NL2Repo
Qwen3.7 Plus41.1%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
SciCode
Qwen3.7 Plus51.3%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B36.8%SourceQwen3.7 Plus leads this result
LiveCodeBench v6
Qwen3.7 Plus89.6%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
Reasoning
Multimodal
MMMU-Pro
Qwen3.7 Plus79%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
MathVision
Qwen3.7 Plus90.3%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
CharXiv
Qwen3.7 Plus85.9%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
ERQA
Qwen3.7 Plus69.8%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
MedXpertQA (MM)
Qwen3.7 Plus71.0%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
ScreenSpot Pro
Qwen3.7 Plus79.0%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
SimpleVQA
Qwen3.7 Plus81.7%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
MMSearch-Plus
Qwen3.7 Plus41.4%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
RealWorldQA
Qwen3.7 Plus86.9%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
OmniDocBench 1.5
Qwen3.7 Plus91.4%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
OCRBench V2
Qwen3.7 Plus70.7%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
ODINW13
Qwen3.7 Plus51.1%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
Video-MME (with subtitle)
Qwen3.7 Plus88.0%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
VideoMMMU
Qwen3.7 Plus85.4%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
MLVU (M-Avg)
Qwen3.7 Plus87.4%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
Knowledge
GPQA
Qwen3.7 Plus90.3%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B69.9%SourceQwen3.7 Plus leads this result
GPQA-D
Qwen3.7 Plus90.3%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B77.1%SourceQwen3.7 Plus leads this result
HLE
Qwen3.7 Plus34.7%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
MMLU-Pro
Qwen3.7 Plus88.5%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
MMLU-Redux
Qwen3.7 Plus94.5%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
SuperGPQA
Qwen3.7 Plus71.4%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
MMMLU
Qwen3.7 Plus89.0%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
HLE w/o tools
Qwen3.7 Plus—Spark-X2.6-4B17.9%SourceNot directly comparable
Multilingual
MMLU-ProX
Qwen3.7 Plus85.4%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
NOVA-63
Qwen3.7 Plus58.8%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
INCLUDE
Qwen3.7 Plus83.0%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
MAXIFE
Qwen3.7 Plus88.8%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
PolyMath
Qwen3.7 Plus84.0%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
Instruction following
Math
HMMT Feb 2026
Qwen3.7 Plus92.9%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B81.3%SourceQwen3.7 Plus leads this result
IMOAnswerBench
Qwen3.7 Plus86.0%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B75.2%SourceQwen3.7 Plus leads this result
Apex
Qwen3.7 Plus22.7%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
Qwen3.7 Plus34.386%SourceSpark-X2.6-4B—Not directly comparable
AIME26
Qwen3.7 Plus—Spark-X2.6-4B91.2%SourceNot directly comparable
60 public results · 13 shared
Watch Qwen3.7 Plus vs Spark-X2.6-4B
One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 5,600+ readers.
Last updated October 20, 2026