Model comparison

Grok Code Fast 1 vs Qwen3.7 Max

Data verified July 23, 2026

Head-to-head evidence from 12 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

Grok Code Fast 1

xAI

38.64/100

Margin

34.2pts

winning →

Qwen3.7 Max

Alibaba

72.84/100

0 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Grok Code Fast 1 #180 (Supported); Qwen3.7 Max #10 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Grok Code Fast 1 and Qwen3.7 Max share 12 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to Grok Code Fast 1; 46 to Qwen3.7 Max.

Updated July 23, 2026

Shared results: 12
Grok Code Fast 1 only: 0
Qwen3.7 Max only: 46
Comparable categories: 1 / 8

Pick Qwen3.7 Max if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok Code Fast 1 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 12 shared benchmark results across 5 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 38.64. 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 70.8. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 70.8% to 80.4%.

Qwen3.7 Max is the reasoning model in the pair, while Grok Code Fast 1 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 256K for Grok Code Fast 1.

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 Grok Code Fast 1 and Qwen3.7 Max
Category	Grok Code Fast 1	Δ	Qwen3.7 Max
Coding	Grok Code Fast 170.8	Margin→ 7.1	Qwen3.7 Max77.9
Agentic	Grok Code Fast 1Not measured	MarginNo overlap	Qwen3.7 Max69.7
Reasoning	Grok Code Fast 1Not measured	MarginNo overlap	Qwen3.7 Max90.4
Knowledge	Grok Code Fast 1Not measured	MarginNo overlap	Qwen3.7 Max64.2
Math	Grok Code Fast 1Not measured	MarginNo overlap	Qwen3.7 Max97.1
Multilingual	Grok Code Fast 1Not measured	MarginNo overlap	Qwen3.7 Max87.0
Inst. Following	Grok Code Fast 1Not measured	MarginNo overlap	Qwen3.7 Max84.4

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

A · Grok Code Fast 1B · Qwen3.7 Max

SWE-bench Verified
Coding
Source ↗
A 70.8%B 80.4%
Winner: Qwen3.7 MaxΔ 9.6
SWE-bench Verified: Grok Code Fast 1 scored 70.8%; 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	Grok Code Fast 1	Qwen3.7 Max	Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens	Grok Code Fast 1$0.2 input / $1.5 output	Qwen3.7 MaxNot available	A complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per second	Grok Code Fast 1172 tok/s	Qwen3.7 MaxNot available	A complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first token	Grok Code Fast 12.81 s	Qwen3.7 MaxNot available	A complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokens	Grok Code Fast 1256K	Qwen3.7 Max1M	Qwen3.7 Max lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic

21 benchmarks

Benchmark	Grok Code Fast 1	Qwen3.7 Max	Result
τ²-bench resultsSource	75.7%	94.7%	Qwen3.7 Max leads
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
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 wins

9 benchmarks

Benchmark	Grok Code Fast 1	Qwen3.7 Max	Result
SWE-bench VerifiedSource	70.8%	80.4%	Qwen3.7 Max leads
AA-SciCodeSource	36.2%	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

3 benchmarks

Benchmark	Grok Code Fast 1	Qwen3.7 Max	Result
AA-LCRSource	48.3%	69.0%	Qwen3.7 Max leads
CritPtSource	0.0%	13.4%	Qwen3.7 Max leads
MRCRv2Source	—	90.4%	Not comparable

Knowledge

13 benchmarks

Benchmark	Grok Code Fast 1	Qwen3.7 Max	Result
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource	21.6%	46.0%	Qwen3.7 Max leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource	72.7%	92.3%	Qwen3.7 Max leads
AA-HLESource	7.5%	38.1%	Qwen3.7 Max leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource	-36.0%	14.1%	Qwen3.7 Max leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource	23.8%	30.1%	Qwen3.7 Max leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource	78.5%	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

3 benchmarks

Benchmark	Grok Code Fast 1	Qwen3.7 Max	Result
HMMT Feb 2026Source	—	97.1%	Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource	—	90.0%	Not comparable
ApexSource	—	44.5%	Not comparable

Multilingual

5 benchmarks

Benchmark	Grok Code Fast 1	Qwen3.7 Max	Result
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

1 benchmarks

Benchmark	Grok Code Fast 1	Qwen3.7 Max	Result
Design Arena WebsiteSource	—	1293	Not comparable

Inst. Following

3 benchmarks

Benchmark	Grok Code Fast 1	Qwen3.7 Max	Result
AA-IFBenchSource	41.4%	80.5%	Qwen3.7 Max leads
IFEvalSource	—	94.3%	Not comparable
IFBenchSource	—	79.1%	Not comparable

Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Grok Code Fast 1 or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 72.84 to 38.64. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 70.8% and 80.4%.

Which is better for coding, Grok Code Fast 1 or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 77.9 versus 70.8. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

xAI Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings

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.