Model comparison
LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract vs Qwen3.7 Max
Head-to-head evidence from 11 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract unranked (Not scored); Qwen3.7 Max #10 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract and Qwen3.7 Max share 11 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 4 results are unique to LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract; 47 to Qwen3.7 Max.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 11
- LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract only
- 4
- Qwen3.7 Max only
- 47
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract and Qwen3.7 Max is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 11 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.
Qwen3.7 Max has the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract.
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 | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract | Δ | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-ExtractNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Max69.7 |
| Coding | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-ExtractNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Max77.9 |
| Reasoning | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-ExtractNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Max90.4 |
| Knowledge | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-ExtractNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Max64.2 |
| Math | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-ExtractNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Max97.1 |
| Multilingual | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-ExtractNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Max87.0 |
| Inst. Following | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-ExtractNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.7 Max84.4 |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract | Qwen3.7 Max | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-ExtractNot available | Qwen3.7 MaxNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-ExtractNot available | Qwen3.7 MaxNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-ExtractNot available | Qwen3.7 MaxNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract128K | Qwen3.7 Max1M | Qwen3.7 Max lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic21 benchmarks
| Benchmark | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract | Qwen3.7 Max | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 8.5% | 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 |
Coding9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract | Qwen3.7 Max | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-SciCodeSource | 3.0% | 48.8% | Qwen3.7 Max leads |
| 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 |
Reasoning3 benchmarks
Knowledge13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract | Qwen3.7 Max | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 1.0% | 46.0% | Qwen3.7 Max leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 28.9% | 92.3% | Qwen3.7 Max leads |
| AA-HLESource | 5.1% | 38.1% | Qwen3.7 Max leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -83.9% | 14.1% | Qwen3.7 Max leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 5.2% | 30.1% | Qwen3.7 Max leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 94.0% | 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 |
Math3 benchmarks
Multilingual5 benchmarks
Multimodal5 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract and Qwen3.7 Max on BenchLM yet?
Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.
Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?
BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.
What data is available for LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract and Qwen3.7 Max today?
Qwen3.7 Max: Pricing unavailable Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
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.