Alibaba · Model release
Data as of October 2, 2026 · How the score is built
Released May 16, 20261M context
Qwen3.7 Max
Decision readingQwen3.7 Max scores 63.5 out of 100 and ranks #43 of 212. This profile shows 41 source-displayable benchmark rows; its strongest eligible category is Multilingual at #1. No comparable first-party API price is published in the catalog.
Released May 16, 2026 — see all recent releases
Qwen3.7 Max will be repriced, updated or retired. Get each notice with its source and date. Follow model changes
Share or export
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.
Capability
63.5/100
field median 52.2#43 of 212 ranked models
Public
#43of 212
Verified #22 of 74
Price
API rate not published
input median $0.95No comparable first-party hosted token rate
Speed
202tok/s
field median 89 tok/sFirst token 14.15 s
Context
1Mtokens
field median 256,000Reported for this model; direct source link not stored
Strongest published evidence
Multilingual ranks #1. A well-rounded choice across a range of tasks.
Validate before choosing
41 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. No comparable first-party API token rate is published.
Source-linked · 41 displayable benchmark rows
Follow model changesCategory 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 #60 of 119Percentile 50thWeight 22%10 benchmarksVerified | 39.3 | 10 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| CodingRank #54 of 144Percentile 63rdWeight 20%10 benchmarksVerified | 45.4 | 10 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| ReasoningRank Not rankedWeight 17%2 benchmarksVerified | 76.3 | 2 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| MultimodalWeight 12%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| KnowledgeRank #41 of 171Percentile 76thWeight 12%9 benchmarksVerified | 59.8 | 9 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| MultilingualRank #1 of 16Percentile 100thWeight 7%5 benchmarksVerified | 100.0 | 5 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| Inst. FollowingRank #17 of 125Percentile 87thWeight 5%2 benchmarksVerified | 89.2 | 2 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| MathRank Not rankedWeight 5%3 benchmarksVerified | 81.9 | 3 benchmarks | Verified |
41 of 645 tracked benchmark slots have displayable evidence · bars run 0–100
Coverage detailsHow 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.
- Agentic10/10 verified
- Coding10/10 verified
- Reasoning2/2 verified
- MultimodalNot measured
- Knowledge9/9 verified
- Multilingual5/5 verified
- Inst. Following2/2 verified
- Math3/3 verified
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
- Agentic50th percentile
- Coding63rd percentile
- ReasoningNot eligible
- MultimodalNot eligible
- Knowledge76th percentile
- Multilingual100th percentile
- Instruction following87th percentile
- MathNot eligible
The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.
Eligible category ranks
- Agentic#60/119
- Coding#54/144
- ReasoningNot ranked
- MultimodalNot ranked
- Knowledge#41/171
- Multilingual#1/16
- Inst. Following#17/125
- MathNot ranked
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.
Coding10 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Pro | Score60.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5.5 · 89.9% | Gap29.3 behind | Weight26% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| SciCodeScientific Code Benchmark | Score53.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Sakana Fugu · 60.1% | Gap6.6 behind | Weight10% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals)LiveCodeBench, Vals AI run | Score87.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Fable 5.1 · 90.5% | Gap3.4 behind | Weight8% ref. weight | |
| SWE Multilingual | Score78.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5.5 · 93.9% | Gap15.6 behind | Weight5% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | Score69.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.5 · 82.0% | Gap12.3 behind | WeightScored in Agentic | Provider exact |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSoftware Engineering Benchmark Verified | Score80.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 96% | Gap15.6 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| NL2Repo | Score47.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash · 65.4% | Gap18.2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| 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 | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| OpenHarmony BenchOpenHarmony Bench v1.0 | Score53.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 60.8% | Gap7.4 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
| SWE-bench (Vals)SWE-bench, Vals AI run | Score68.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 97.0% | Gap28.2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Verified |
Agentic10 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | Score69.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.5 · 82% | Gap12.3 behind | Weight6% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| MCP Atlas | Score76.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Muse Spark 1.1 · 88.1% | Gap11.7 behind | Weight4% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)Terminal-Bench 2.1, Vals AI run | Score61.0% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 87.3% | Gap26.3 behind | Weight3% ref. weight | |
| BFCL v4Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard v4 | Score75.0% | Versus best verified row Best verified: BTL-3 · 88.5% | Gap13.5 behind | Weight3% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| HLE w/ toolsHumanity's Last Exam with tools | Score53.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5.5 · 67.7% | Gap14.2 behind | Weight3% ref. weight | 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-1.5-397B · 81.4% | Gap16.2 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 |
| 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 20% | Provider exact |
| CritPtCritical Physics Tasks | Score13.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 31.7% | Gap18.3 behind | WeightFeeds overall | Provider exact |
Knowledge9 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HLEHumanity's Last Exam | Score41.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Fable 5.1 · 65% | Gap23.6 behind | Weight44% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| MMLU-ProMassive Multitask Language Understanding Professional | Score89.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 89.6% | GapBest verified | Weight6% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| MMLU-Pro (Vals)MMLU-Pro, Vals AI run | Score89.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Fable 5.1 · 92.4% | Gap3.1 behind | Weight6% ref. weight | Verified |
| GPQAGraduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A | Score92.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 96% | Gap3.6 behind | Weight3% ref. weight | 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 | Weight2% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| GPQA Diamond (Vals)GPQA Diamond, Vals AI run | Score90.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Gemini 3.1 Pro · 95.5% | Gap5.3 behind | Weight2% ref. weight | |
| GPQA-DGPQA Diamond | Score92.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 96.0% | Gap3.6 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 |
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 70% | Provider exact |
| IFEvalInstruction-Following Eval | Score94.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.5-27B · 95% | Gap0.7 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: Hy4 preview · 74.2% | Gap29.7 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Bars run 0–100; the dark tick marks the best source-verified value
All 41 rowsLineage
The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. Each score is estimated for that model; a relative can inform a sparse estimate but never sets a floor, so a newer release can score below an earlier one. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.
Base entry
Qwen3.7 Max release history
Radar confirmed these at the source. Use Qwen3.7 Max in your work? Explore Radar to follow supported changes and choose your alerts.
Radar
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
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 #43 of 212 on the public leaderboard with a score of 63.46/100. Its source-verified position is #22 of 74.
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.
41 of 645 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 #60. a well-rounded choice across a range of tasks.
Last updated October 2, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.
Questions
How does Qwen3.7 Max perform overall in AI benchmarks?
Qwen3.7 Max ranks #43 out of 212 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 63.46/100. Its evidence status is Supported, and this profile shows 41 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 #41 out of 171 eligible models for knowledge and understanding, with a public category score of 59.8/100. 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 coding and programming?
Qwen3.7 Max ranks #54 out of 144 eligible models for coding and programming, with a public category score of 45.4/100. 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 #60 out of 119 eligible models for agentic tool use and computer tasks, with a public category score of 39.3/100. 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 #17 out of 125 eligible models for instruction following, with a public category score of 89.2/100. 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 multilingual tasks?
Qwen3.7 Max ranks #1 out of 16 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 57 source-displayable rows across 645 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.