Model comparison
Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs Qwen3.7 Max
Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude 3.5 Sonnet #132 (Estimated); Qwen3.7 Max #10 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Qwen3.7 Max share 2 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 2 results are unique to Claude 3.5 Sonnet; 56 to Qwen3.7 Max.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 2
- Claude 3.5 Sonnet only
- 2
- Qwen3.7 Max only
- 56
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Pick Qwen3.7 Max if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude 3.5 Sonnet only becomes the better choice if you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 3 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 Max is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 72.84 to 47.74. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Qwen3.7 Max's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 97.1 against 1.6. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 59.4% to 92.4%.
Qwen3.7 Max is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude 3.5 Sonnet is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Qwen3.7 Max gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude 3.5 Sonnet.
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 | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Δ | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | Claude 3.5 Sonnet1.6 | Margin→ 95.5 | Qwen3.7 Max97.1 |
| Coding | Claude 3.5 Sonnet49.0 | Margin→ 28.9 | Qwen3.7 Max77.9 |
| Knowledge | Claude 3.5 Sonnet59.4 | Margin→ 4.8 | Qwen3.7 Max64.2 |
| Agentic | Claude 3.5 SonnetNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Max69.7 |
| Reasoning | Claude 3.5 SonnetNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Max90.4 |
| Multilingual | Claude 3.5 SonnetNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Max87.0 |
| Inst. Following | Claude 3.5 SonnetNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Max84.4 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 59.4%B 92.4%Winner: Qwen3.7 MaxΔ 33GPQA: Claude 3.5 Sonnet scored 59.4%; Qwen3.7 Max scored 92.4%. Qwen3.7 Max wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 49%B 80.4%Winner: Qwen3.7 MaxΔ 31.4SWE-bench Verified: Claude 3.5 Sonnet scored 49%; Qwen3.7 Max scored 80.4%. Qwen3.7 Max wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen3.7 Max | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude 3.5 Sonnet$3 input / $15 output | Qwen3.7 MaxNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude 3.5 SonnetNot available | Qwen3.7 MaxNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude 3.5 SonnetNot available | Qwen3.7 MaxNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude 3.5 Sonnet200K | Qwen3.7 Max1M | Qwen3.7 Max lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic21 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen3.7 Max | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 69.7% | Not comparable |
| QwenClawBenchSource | — | 64.3% | Not comparable |
| QwenWebBenchSource | — | 1568 | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 65.2% | Not comparable |
| BFCL v4Source | — | 75.0% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 76.4% | Not comparable |
| VITA-BenchSource | — | 47.9% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | — | 53.5% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 30.6% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 94.7% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 38.7% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1273 | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 64.27% | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | — | 18.7% | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 908 | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | — | 25.6% | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | — | 45.0% | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | — | 42.5% | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | — | 50.8% | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | — | 74.5% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 83.4% | Not comparable |
CodingQwen3.7 Max wins9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen3.7 Max | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 49% | 80.4% | Qwen3.7 Max leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | — | 60.6% | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | — | 78.3% | Not comparable |
| NL2RepoSource | — | 47.2% | Not comparable |
| SciCodeSource | — | 53.5% | Not comparable |
| LiveCodeBenchSource | — | 91.6% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 69.7% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 66.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | — | 48.8% | Not comparable |
Reasoning3 benchmarks
KnowledgeQwen3.7 Max wins13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen3.7 Max | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 59.4% | 92.4% | Qwen3.7 Max leads |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 92.4% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 41.4% | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 89.6% | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ReduxSource | — | 95% | Not comparable |
| SuperGPQASource | — | 73.6% | Not comparable |
| MMMLUSource | — | 90.3% | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 46.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 92.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 38.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | 14.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 30.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 22.9% | Not comparable |
MathQwen3.7 Max wins5 benchmarks
Multilingual5 benchmarks
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Qwen3.7 Max | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | — | 1293 | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Qwen3.7 Max?
Qwen3.7 Max is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 72.84 to 47.74. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 59.4% and 92.4%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Qwen3.7 Max?
Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 64.2 versus 59.4. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Qwen3.7 Max?
Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 77.9 versus 49. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Qwen3.7 Max?
Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 97.1 versus 1.6. Claude 3.5 Sonnet stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Related Comparisons
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.