Skip to main content

Model comparison

GPT-5.4 Pro vs Qwen3.7 Max

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

60.89/100
Margin
12.0pts
winning →
72.84/100
1 category wins3 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: GPT-5.4 Pro #44 (Estimated); Qwen3.7 Max #10 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. GPT-5.4 Pro and Qwen3.7 Max share 2 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 10 results are unique to GPT-5.4 Pro; 56 to Qwen3.7 Max.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
2
GPT-5.4 Pro only
10
Qwen3.7 Max only
56
Comparable categories
4 / 8

Pick Qwen3.7 Max if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-5.4 Pro only becomes the better choice if agentic is the priority or you need the larger 1.05M context window.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results across 2 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 Max is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 72.84 to 60.89. 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 46.9. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HLE, 58.7% to 41.4%. GPT-5.4 Pro does hit back in agentic, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

GPT-5.4 Pro gives you the larger context window at 1.05M, compared with 1M for Qwen3.7 Max.

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 GPT-5.4 Pro and Qwen3.7 Max
CategoryGPT-5.4 ProΔQwen3.7 Max
MathGPT-5.4 Pro46.9Margin 50.2Qwen3.7 Max97.1
AgenticGPT-5.4 Pro89.3Margin 19.6Qwen3.7 Max69.7
ReasoningGPT-5.4 Pro83.3Margin 7.1Qwen3.7 Max90.4
KnowledgeGPT-5.4 Pro58.7Margin 5.5Qwen3.7 Max64.2
CodingGPT-5.4 ProNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Max77.9
MultilingualGPT-5.4 ProNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Max87.0
MultimodalGPT-5.4 Pro94.0MarginNo overlapQwen3.7 MaxNot measured
Inst. FollowingGPT-5.4 ProNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Max84.4

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · GPT-5.4 ProB · Qwen3.7 Max
  1. HLE

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 58.7%B 41.4%
    Winner: GPT-5.4 ProΔ 17.3
    HLE: GPT-5.4 Pro scored 58.7%; Qwen3.7 Max scored 41.4%. GPT-5.4 Pro wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricGPT-5.4 ProQwen3.7 MaxComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGPT-5.4 Pro$30 input / $180 outputQwen3.7 MaxNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondGPT-5.4 Pro74 tok/sQwen3.7 MaxNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGPT-5.4 Pro151.79 sQwen3.7 MaxNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGPT-5.4 Pro1.05MQwen3.7 Max1MGPT-5.4 Pro lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticGPT-5.4 Pro wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 ProQwen3.7 MaxResult
BrowseCompSource 89.3%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
τ²-bench resultsSource 94.7%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 38.7%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1273Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 64.27%Not 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
Coding
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 ProQwen3.7 MaxResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 80.4%Not comparable
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
ReasoningQwen3.7 Max wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 ProQwen3.7 MaxResult
ARC-AGI-2Source 83.3%Not comparable
CritPtSource 30.0%13.4%GPT-5.4 Pro leads
MRCRv2Source 90.4%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 69.0%Not comparable
KnowledgeQwen3.7 Max wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 ProQwen3.7 MaxResult
HLESource 58.7%41.4%GPT-5.4 Pro leads
FrontierScienceSource 36.7%Not comparable
FrontierScience ResearchSource 36.7%Not comparable
HLE w/o toolsSource 42.7%Not comparable
GPQASource 92.4%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 92.4%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 wins
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 ProQwen3.7 MaxResult
IPhO 2025 (Theory)Source 93.5%Not comparable
FrontierMath (legacy)Source 50%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 50.000%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 37.500%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source 97.1%Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource 90.0%Not comparable
ApexSource 44.5%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 ProQwen3.7 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
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 ProQwen3.7 MaxResult
MMMU-ProSource 94%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1293Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 ProQwen3.7 MaxResult
IFEvalSource 94.3%Not comparable
IFBenchSource 79.1%Not comparable
AA-IFBenchSource 80.5%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (5)

Which is better, GPT-5.4 Pro or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 72.84 to 60.89. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HLE, where the scores are 58.7% and 41.4%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, GPT-5.4 Pro or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 64.2 versus 58.7. Inside this category, HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, GPT-5.4 Pro or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 97.1 versus 46.9. GPT-5.4 Pro stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Which is better for reasoning, GPT-5.4 Pro or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 90.4 versus 83.3. Inside this category, CritPt is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5.4 Pro or Qwen3.7 Max?

GPT-5.4 Pro has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 89.3 versus 69.7. Qwen3.7 Max stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

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.