Skip to main content

Model comparison

Claude 4 Sonnet vs Qwen3.7 Max

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 14 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

42.79/100
Margin
30.1pts
winning →
72.84/100
0 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude 4 Sonnet #158 (Supported); Qwen3.7 Max #10 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude 4 Sonnet and Qwen3.7 Max share 14 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 2 results are unique to Claude 4 Sonnet; 44 to Qwen3.7 Max.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
14
Claude 4 Sonnet only
2
Qwen3.7 Max only
44
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick Qwen3.7 Max if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude 4 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 14 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 1 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 42.79. 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 coding, where it averages 77.9 against 72.7. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 72.7% to 80.4%.

Qwen3.7 Max is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude 4 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 4 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 scores and score margins for Claude 4 Sonnet and Qwen3.7 Max
CategoryClaude 4 SonnetΔQwen3.7 Max
CodingClaude 4 Sonnet72.7Margin 5.2Qwen3.7 Max77.9
AgenticClaude 4 SonnetNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Max69.7
ReasoningClaude 4 SonnetNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Max90.4
KnowledgeClaude 4 SonnetNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Max64.2
MathClaude 4 SonnetNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Max97.1
MultilingualClaude 4 SonnetNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Max87.0
Inst. FollowingClaude 4 SonnetNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Max84.4

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Claude 4 SonnetB · Qwen3.7 Max
  1. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 72.7%B 80.4%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 MaxΔ 7.7
    SWE-bench Verified: Claude 4 Sonnet scored 72.7%; 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.

MetricClaude 4 SonnetQwen3.7 MaxComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude 4 Sonnet$3 input / $15 outputQwen3.7 MaxNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude 4 Sonnet40 tok/sQwen3.7 MaxNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude 4 Sonnet1.33 sQwen3.7 MaxNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude 4 Sonnet200KQwen3.7 Max1MQwen3.7 Max lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetQwen3.7 MaxResult
τ²-bench resultsSource 52.3%94.7%Qwen3.7 Max leads
Gert LabsSource 39.66%64.27%Qwen3.7 Max leads
JobBenchSource 18.4%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 69.7%Not comparable
QwenClawBenchSource 64.3%Not comparable
QwenWebBenchSource 1568Not 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
GDPval-AASource 38.7%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1273Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource 18.7%Not comparable
AA BriefcaseSource 908Not 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 wins
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetQwen3.7 MaxResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 72.7%80.4%Qwen3.7 Max leads
AA-SciCodeSource 37.3%48.8%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
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetQwen3.7 MaxResult
AA-LCRSource 44.3%69.0%Qwen3.7 Max leads
CritPtSource 1.1%13.4%Qwen3.7 Max leads
MRCRv2Source 90.4%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetQwen3.7 MaxResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 25.5%46.0%Qwen3.7 Max leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 68.3%92.3%Qwen3.7 Max leads
AA-HLESource 4.0%38.1%Qwen3.7 Max leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -9.2%14.1%Qwen3.7 Max leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 22.4%30.1%Qwen3.7 Max leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 40.8%22.9%Qwen3.7 Max leads
GPQASource 92.4%Not comparable
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
Math
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetQwen3.7 MaxResult
HMMT Feb 2026Source 97.1%Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource 90.0%Not comparable
ApexSource 44.5%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetQwen3.7 MaxResult
MMLU-ProXSource 87%Not comparable
NOVA-63Source 59.0%Not comparable
INCLUDESource 86.2%Not comparable
MAXIFESource 89.2%Not comparable
PolyMathSource 86.5%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetQwen3.7 MaxResult
AA-MMMU-ProSource 62.4%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 11751293Qwen3.7 Max leads
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude 4 SonnetQwen3.7 MaxResult
AA-IFBenchSource 45.4%80.5%Qwen3.7 Max leads
IFEvalSource 94.3%Not comparable
IFBenchSource 79.1%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Claude 4 Sonnet or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 72.84 to 42.79. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 72.7% and 80.4%.

Which is better for coding, Claude 4 Sonnet or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 77.9 versus 72.7. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 23, 2026

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.