Model comparison
Claude Sonnet 5 vs Qwen3.7 Plus
Head-to-head evidence from 23 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Sonnet 5 #29 (Estimated); Qwen3.7 Plus #21 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Sonnet 5 and Qwen3.7 Plus share 23 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 13 results are unique to Claude Sonnet 5; 46 to Qwen3.7 Plus.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 23
- Claude Sonnet 5 only
- 13
- Qwen3.7 Plus only
- 46
- Comparable categories
- 4 / 8
Pick Qwen3.7 Plus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Sonnet 5 only becomes the better choice if agentic is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 23 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 4 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 Plus has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 67.22 versus 65.32. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
Qwen3.7 Plus's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 60.1 against 57.4. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HLE, 57.4% to 34.7%. Claude Sonnet 5 does hit back in agentic, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
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 Sonnet 5 | Δ | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Claude Sonnet 581.9 | Margin← 10.2 | Qwen3.7 Plus71.7 |
| Multimodal | Claude Sonnet 588.3 | Margin← 6.8 | Qwen3.7 Plus81.5 |
| Knowledge | Claude Sonnet 557.4 | Margin→ 2.7 | Qwen3.7 Plus60.1 |
| Coding | Claude Sonnet 576.7 | Margin← 1.1 | Qwen3.7 Plus75.6 |
| Reasoning | Claude Sonnet 5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Plus91.7 |
| Math | Claude Sonnet 5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Plus92.9 |
| Multilingual | Claude Sonnet 5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Plus85.4 |
| Inst. Following | Claude Sonnet 5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Plus84.5 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
HLE
KnowledgeA 57.4%B 34.7%Winner: Claude Sonnet 5Δ 22.7HLE: Claude Sonnet 5 scored 57.4%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 34.7%. Claude Sonnet 5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 80.4%B 70.3%Winner: Claude Sonnet 5Δ 10.1Terminal-Bench 2.0: Claude Sonnet 5 scored 80.4%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 70.3%. Claude Sonnet 5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
OSWorld-Verified
AgenticA 81.2%B 73.3%Winner: Claude Sonnet 5Δ 7.9OSWorld-Verified: Claude Sonnet 5 scored 81.2%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 73.3%. Claude Sonnet 5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 85.2%B 77.7%Winner: Claude Sonnet 5Δ 7.5SWE-bench Verified: Claude Sonnet 5 scored 85.2%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 77.7%. Claude Sonnet 5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 63.2%B 57.6%Winner: Claude Sonnet 5Δ 5.6SWE-bench Pro: Claude Sonnet 5 scored 63.2%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 57.6%. Claude Sonnet 5 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 5 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Sonnet 5$2 input / $10 output | Qwen3.7 PlusNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Sonnet 5Not available | Qwen3.7 PlusNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Sonnet 5Not available | Qwen3.7 PlusNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Sonnet 51M | Qwen3.7 Plus1M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticClaude Sonnet 5 wins24 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 80.4% | 70.3% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| BrowseCompSource | 84.7% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | 57.4% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 81.2% | 73.3% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1607 | 936 | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 46.7% | 20.8% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 55.4% | 21.8% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 1388 | — | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | 39.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | 44.7% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | 90.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 28.2% | — | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | 80.5% | — | Not comparable |
| QwenClawBenchSource | — | 61.8% | Not comparable |
| QwenWebBenchSource | — | 1536 | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 62.7% | Not comparable |
| BFCL v4Source | — | 72.9% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 73.2% | Not comparable |
| VITA-BenchSource | — | 45.6% | Not comparable |
| DeepPlanningSource | — | 62.3% | Not comparable |
| AndroidWorldSource | — | 81.0% | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 22.4% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 93% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | — | 2.8% | Not comparable |
CodingClaude Sonnet 5 wins12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 85.2% | 77.7% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 63.2% | 57.6% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 78.3% | 75.8% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| SWE MultimodalSource | 28.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 80.4% | 70.3% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource | 42.7% | — | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | 61.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 71.5% | 55.9% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 53.6% | 45.5% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| NL2RepoSource | — | 41.1% | Not comparable |
| SciCodeSource | — | 51.3% | Not comparable |
| LiveCodeBenchSource | — | 89.6% | Not comparable |
Reasoning3 benchmarks
KnowledgeQwen3.7 Plus wins14 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| HLESource | 57.4% | 34.7% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 43.2% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 53.4% | 39.0% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 91.1% | 90.0% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 39.6% | 33.4% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 15.3% | 2.4% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 38.3% | 22.2% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 37.3% | 25.5% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| GPQASource | — | 90.3% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 90.3% | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 88.5% | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ReduxSource | — | 94.5% | Not comparable |
| SuperGPQASource | — | 71.4% | Not comparable |
| MMMLUSource | — | 89.0% | Not comparable |
Math3 benchmarks
Multilingual5 benchmarks
MultimodalClaude Sonnet 5 wins18 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| CharXivSource | 88.3% | 85.9% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| CharXiv w/o toolsSource | 77% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 77.3% | 80.5% | Qwen3.7 Plus leads |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1314 | 1288 | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| MMMU-ProSource | — | 79% | Not comparable |
| MathVisionSource | — | 90.3% | Not comparable |
| ERQASource | — | 69.8% | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (MM)Source | — | 71.0% | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | — | 79.0% | Not comparable |
| SimpleVQASource | — | 81.7% | Not comparable |
| MMSearch-PlusSource | — | 41.4% | Not comparable |
| RealWorldQASource | — | 86.9% | Not comparable |
| OmniDocBench 1.5Source | — | 91.4% | Not comparable |
| OCRBench V2Source | — | 70.7% | Not comparable |
| ODINW13Source | — | 51.1% | Not comparable |
| Video-MME (with subtitle)Source | — | 88.0% | Not comparable |
| VideoMMMUSource | — | 85.4% | Not comparable |
| MLVU (M-Avg)Source | — | 87.4% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (5)
Which is better, Claude Sonnet 5 or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 67.22 to 65.32. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HLE, where the scores are 57.4% and 34.7%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Sonnet 5 or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 60.1 versus 57.4. Inside this category, HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Claude Sonnet 5 or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Claude Sonnet 5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 76.7 versus 75.6. Inside this category, AA Coding Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Sonnet 5 or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Claude Sonnet 5 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.9 versus 71.7. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Claude Sonnet 5 or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Claude Sonnet 5 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 88.3 versus 81.5. Inside this category, Design Arena Website is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
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.