Capability
71.6/100
field median 58.2
#16 of 218 ranked models
Superseded.Alibaba has newer models in this line:Qwen3.8 Max Preview
Qwen3.7 Max
Released May 16, 2026 — see all recent releases
Decision reading
Qwen3.7 Max scores 71.6 out of 100 and ranks #16 of 218. This profile shows 35 source-displayable benchmark rows; its strongest eligible category is Multilingual at #1. No comparable first-party API price is published in the catalog.
Data as of August 18, 2026 · How the score is built
Strongest published evidence
Multilingual ranks #1. A well-rounded choice across a range of tasks.
Validate before choosing
35 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. No comparable first-party API token rate is published.
Decision snapshot
Each value carries a field reference instead of floating alone. Markers compare this model with the current ranked and priced catalog; they are not absolute quality thresholds.
Price
API rate not published
input median $1
No comparable first-party hosted token rate
Speed
204tok/s
field median 97 tok/s
First token 14.07 s
Context
1Mtokens
field median 200,000
Reported for this model; direct source link not stored
Capability shape
Each axis shows percentile within that category’s eligible cohort. The comparison outline is the median of the six nearest public-score peers; a collapsed vertex means the category is not rank-eligible.
Qwen3.7 Max category percentile values
- Agentic22nd percentile
- Coding62nd percentile
- ReasoningNot eligible
- Knowledge63rd percentile
- MathNot eligible
- Multilingual100th percentile
- MultimodalNot eligible
- Instruction following77th percentile
The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.
Eligible category ranks
- Agentic#103/131
- Coding#52/135
- ReasoningNot ranked
- Knowledge#22/57
- MathNot ranked
- Multilingual#1/13
- MultimodalNot ranked
- Inst. Following#10/40
Top decileTop quartileMid-fieldNot eligible
How much of this is verified
Coverage is split by category so a strong number never hides a thin evidence base. Verified means the row is tied to a published source; provisional rows remain visible but separate.
- Agentic9/9 verified
- Coding7/7 verified
- Reasoning2/2 verified
- Knowledge7/7 verified
- Math3/3 verified
- Multilingual5/5 verified
- MultimodalNot measured
- Inst. Following2/2 verified
Verified sourceProvisionalNot measured
Spec sheet
Each documented value carries its source. Missing fields stay visible as not sourced or not published, rather than disappearing from the page.
- API model ID
- Not published
- Context window
- 1M
- Maximum output
- Not sourced yet
- Knowledge cutoff
- Not sourced yet
- Input modalities
- Not sourced yet
- Output modalities
- Not sourced yet
- Parameters
- Not disclosed by the provider
- Availability
- Not sourced yet
- Cloud regions
- Not tracked yet
- Lifecycle
- Superseded
- API capabilities
- Tool calling, structured outputs, and batch support are not tracked yet
- Prompt caching
- Not documented in the pricing record
- Self-host
- Weights are not published
- Rate limits
- Not tracked yet
Category score record
Scores and ranks appear only where published evidence can be displayed. The table keeps the score, weight, cohort, and evidence state together.
| Category | Score | Rank | Percentile | Weight | Benchmarks | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AgenticRank #103 of 131Percentile 22ndWeight 22%9 benchmarksVerified | 39.8 | #103 of 131 | 22nd | 22% | 9 benchmarks | Verified |
| CodingRank #52 of 135Percentile 62ndWeight 20%7 benchmarksVerified | 52.8 | #52 of 135 | 62nd | 20% | 7 benchmarks | Verified |
| ReasoningRank Not rankedWeight 17%2 benchmarksVerified | 85.8 | Not ranked | Not available | 17% | 2 benchmarks | Verified |
| KnowledgeRank #22 of 57Percentile 63rdWeight 12%7 benchmarksVerified | 71.7 | #22 of 57 | 63rd | 12% | 7 benchmarks | Verified |
| MathRank Not rankedWeight 5%3 benchmarksVerified | 81.8 | Not ranked | Not available | 5% | 3 benchmarks | Verified |
| MultilingualRank #1 of 13Percentile 100thWeight 7%5 benchmarksVerified | 100.0 | #1 of 13 | 100th | 7% | 5 benchmarks | Verified |
| MultimodalWeight 12%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 12% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| Inst. FollowingRank #10 of 40Percentile 77thWeight 5%2 benchmarksVerified | 92.6 | #10 of 40 | 77th | 5% | 2 benchmarks | Verified |
Benchmark ledger
Coding opens by default. The marker compares each value with the best source-verified result in the catalog; provisional leaders do not set the reference. Expand the remaining categories for every published row.
Coding7 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBenchLiveCodeBench: Holistic and Contamination Free Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code | Score91.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 91.6% | GapBest verified | WeightWeighted 38% | Provider exact |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSoftware Engineering Benchmark Verified | Score80.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 96% | Gap15.6 behind | WeightWeighted 16% | Provider exact |
| SciCodeScientific Code Benchmark | Score53.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Sakana Fugu · 60.1% | Gap6.6 behind | WeightWeighted 16% | Provider exact |
| SWE-bench Pro | Score60.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Mythos 5 · 80.3% | Gap19.7 behind | WeightWeighted 10% | Provider exact |
| SWE Multilingual | Score78.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 89.5% | Gap11.2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| NL2Repo | Score47.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 · 61.5% | Gap14.3 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | Score69.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 91.9% | Gap22.2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Agentic9 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | Score69.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 91.9% | Gap22.2 behind | WeightWeighted 38% | Provider exact |
| QwenClawBench | Score64.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 64.3% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| Claw-Eval | Score65.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Ornith-1.0-397B · 77.1% | Gap11.9 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| BFCL v4Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard v4 | Score75.0% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 75.0% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| MCP Atlas | Score76.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Muse Spark 1.1 · 88.1% | Gap11.7 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| VITA-Bench | Score47.9% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 47.9% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| HLE w/ toolsHumanity's Last Exam with tools | Score53.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 64.7% | Gap11.2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| Gert LabsGert Labs Composite Game Benchmark | Score64.27% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 4.8 · 72.97% | Gap8.7 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
| ResearchClawBench | Score18.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 4.8 · 21.1% | Gap2.4 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
Reasoning2 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MRCRv2 | Score90.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Sakana Fugu-Ultra · 93.6% | Gap3.2 behind | WeightWeighted 31% | Provider exact |
| CritPtCritical Physics Tasks | Score13.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GLM-5.2 · 20.9% | Gap7.5 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Knowledge7 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HLEHumanity's Last Exam | Score41.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 64.7% | Gap23.3 behind | WeightWeighted 45% | Provider exact |
| MMLU-ProMassive Multitask Language Understanding Professional | Score89.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 89.6% | GapBest verified | WeightWeighted 30% | Provider exact |
| GPQAGraduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A | Score92.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Sakana Fugu-Ultra · 95.5% | Gap3.1 behind | WeightWeighted 7% | Provider exact |
| SuperGPQASuperGPQA: Scaling LLM Evaluation Across 285 Graduate Disciplines | Score73.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) · 73.9% | Gap0.3 behind | WeightWeighted 7% | Provider exact |
| GPQA-DGPQA Diamond | Score92.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Sakana Fugu-Ultra · 95.5% | Gap3.1 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| MMLU-Redux | Score95% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 95% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| MMMLU | Score90.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Interfaze Beta · 90.9% | Gap0.6 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Math3 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HMMT Feb 2026Harvard-MIT Mathematics Tournament February 2026 | Score97.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 97.1% | GapBest verified | WeightWeighted 25% | Provider exact |
| IMOAnswerBench | Score90.0% | Versus best verified row Best verified: dots3-note Preview · 90.9% | Gap0.9 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| Apex | Score44.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 44.5% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Multilingual5 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProX | Score87% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 87% | GapBest verified | WeightWeighted 100% | Provider exact |
| NOVA-63 | Score59.0% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.5 397B · 59.1% | Gap0.1 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| INCLUDE | Score86.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 89.8% | Gap3.6 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| MAXIFE | Score89.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 89.2% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| PolyMath | Score86.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 86.5% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Inst. Following2 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IFBenchInstruction Following Benchmark | Score79.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: MAI-Thinking-1 · 85% | Gap5.9 behind | WeightWeighted 65% | Provider exact |
| IFEvalInstruction-Following Eval | Score94.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.5-27B · 95% | Gap0.7 behind | WeightWeighted 35% | Provider exact |
Lineage
The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.
May 16, 2026 · you are here
Qwen3.7 MaxScore 71.6 · Price not listed
Jul 19, 2026
Qwen3.8 Max PreviewNot publicly ranked · Price not listed
Base entry
How to read this profile
The visual layer above carries the decisions. These notes preserve the model, ranking, coverage, and family context behind the numbers.
Qwen3.7 Max ranks #16 of 218 on the public leaderboard with a score of 71.6/100. Its source-verified position is #13 of 104.
Qwen3.7 Max is a proprietary model with a 1M context window. It uses an explicit reasoning mode, which can improve complex problem solving while adding latency and token use.
Official exact-value snapshot from Qwen's May 16, 2026 Qwen3.7 launch post. The post names the API model as qwen3.7-max, describes a 1,000,000-token context window with thinking enabled, and says Model Studio availability is coming soon.
35 of 437 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.
Its strongest eligible category is Multilingual at #1, while its lowest eligible position is Agentic at #103. a well-rounded choice across a range of tasks.
Radar
Full release historyQwen3.7 Max release history
Qwen3.7 Max released
Alibaba · Model release
Source confirmed
Frequently asked questions
How does Qwen3.7 Max perform overall in AI benchmarks?
Qwen3.7 Max ranks #16 out of 218 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 71.6/100. Its evidence status is Supported, and this profile shows 35 source-displayable benchmark rows. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.
Is Qwen3.7 Max good for knowledge and understanding?
Qwen3.7 Max ranks #22 out of 57 eligible models for knowledge and understanding, with a public category score of 71.7/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Qwen3.7 Max good for coding and programming?
Qwen3.7 Max ranks #52 out of 135 eligible models for coding and programming, with a public category score of 52.8/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Qwen3.7 Max good for mathematics?
Qwen3.7 Max has source-displayable benchmark coverage for mathematics, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.
Is Qwen3.7 Max good for reasoning and logic?
Qwen3.7 Max has source-displayable benchmark coverage for reasoning and logic, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.
Is Qwen3.7 Max good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?
Qwen3.7 Max ranks #103 out of 131 eligible models for agentic tool use and computer tasks, with a public category score of 39.8/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Qwen3.7 Max good for instruction following?
Qwen3.7 Max ranks #10 out of 40 eligible models for instruction following, with a public category score of 92.6/100. That places it in the current top ten for this category. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Qwen3.7 Max good for multilingual tasks?
Qwen3.7 Max ranks #1 out of 13 eligible models for multilingual tasks, with a public category score of 100/100. That places it in the current top ten for this category. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Does Qwen3.7 Max have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?
No. Qwen3.7 Max currently has 51 source-displayable rows across 437 tracked benchmark slots. The profile exposes published, non-generated evidence and leaves missing categories blank until an exact evaluation is available. Coverage describes how much was measured; it is not a penalty added to an individual benchmark result.
What is the context window size of Qwen3.7 Max?
Qwen3.7 Max has a reported context window of 1M in the exact-model catalog record. The value stays visible, but the profile marks its source link as unavailable instead of presenting it as directly documented. Maximum output length remains separate because providers often publish a different limit.
Last updated August 18, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.
Watch Qwen3.7 Max in the weekly brief
Get one weekly email when material rank, price, availability, or benchmark evidence changes are worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.