Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Interfaze Beta vs Qwen3.7 Max

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 3 shared benchmark results across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

N/A
No comparison
72.84/100
1 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Interfaze Beta unranked (Not scored); Qwen3.7 Max #10 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Interfaze Beta and Qwen3.7 Max share 3 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 7 results are unique to Interfaze Beta; 55 to Qwen3.7 Max.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
3
Interfaze Beta only
7
Qwen3.7 Max only
55
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Treat this as a split decision. Interfaze Beta makes more sense if knowledge is the priority; Qwen3.7 Max is the better fit if its strengths line up with your actual workload.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 3 shared benchmark results across 1 evidence category; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Interfaze Beta and Qwen3.7 Max finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.

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 Interfaze Beta and Qwen3.7 Max
CategoryInterfaze BetaΔQwen3.7 Max
KnowledgeInterfaze Beta89.9Margin← 25.7Qwen3.7 Max64.2
AgenticInterfaze BetaNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Max69.7
CodingInterfaze BetaNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Max77.9
ReasoningInterfaze BetaNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Max90.4
MathInterfaze BetaNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Max97.1
MultilingualInterfaze BetaNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Max87.0
MultimodalInterfaze Beta71.1MarginNo overlapQwen3.7 MaxNot measured
Inst. FollowingInterfaze BetaNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Max84.4

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · Interfaze BetaB · Qwen3.7 Max

  1. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 89.9%B 92.4%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 MaxΔ 2.5
    GPQA: Interfaze Beta scored 89.9%; Qwen3.7 Max scored 92.4%. Qwen3.7 Max wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricInterfaze BetaQwen3.7 MaxComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensInterfaze Beta$1.5 input / $3.5 outputQwen3.7 MaxNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondInterfaze BetaNot availableQwen3.7 MaxNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenInterfaze BetaNot availableQwen3.7 MaxNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensInterfaze Beta1MQwen3.7 Max1MListed context windows are equal.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkInterfaze BetaQwen3.7 MaxResult
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
BenchmarkInterfaze BetaQwen3.7 MaxResult
Spider 2.0-LiteSource 52.9%—Not comparable
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
Reasoning
BenchmarkInterfaze BetaQwen3.7 MaxResult
MRCRv2Source —90.4%Not comparable
CritPtSource —13.4%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource —69.0%Not comparable
KnowledgeInterfaze Beta wins
BenchmarkInterfaze BetaQwen3.7 MaxResult
GPQASource 89.9%92.4%Qwen3.7 Max leads
GPQA-DSource 89.9%92.4%Qwen3.7 Max leads
MMMLUSource 90.9%90.3%Interfaze Beta leads
HLESource —41.4%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource —89.6%Not comparable
MMLU-ReduxSource —95%Not comparable
SuperGPQASource —73.6%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
Math
BenchmarkInterfaze BetaQwen3.7 MaxResult
HMMT Feb 2026Source —97.1%Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource —90.0%Not comparable
ApexSource —44.5%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkInterfaze BetaQwen3.7 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
BenchmarkInterfaze BetaQwen3.7 MaxResult
OCRBench V2Source 70.7%—Not comparable
olmOCRSource 85.7%—Not comparable
RefCOCO (avg)Source 82.1%—Not comparable
VoxPopuli WERSource 2.4%—Not comparable
MMMU-ProSource 71.1%—Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource —1293Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkInterfaze BetaQwen3.7 MaxResult
SOB Value AccSource 79.5%—Not comparable
IFEvalSource —94.3%Not comparable
IFBenchSource —79.1%Not comparable
AA-IFBenchSource —80.5%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Interfaze Beta or Qwen3.7 Max?

Interfaze Beta and Qwen3.7 Max are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Interfaze Beta or Qwen3.7 Max?

Interfaze Beta has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 89.9 versus 64.2. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Interfaze 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.