Skip to main content

Model comparison

Qwen3.6 Plus vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 41 shared benchmark results across 8 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

65.2/100
Margin
2.0pts
winning →
67.22/100
0 category wins8 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Qwen3.6 Plus #30 (Supported); Qwen3.7 Plus #21 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Qwen3.6 Plus and Qwen3.7 Plus share 41 comparable benchmark results. 8 of 8 categories are comparable. 19 results are unique to Qwen3.6 Plus; 28 to Qwen3.7 Plus.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
41
Qwen3.6 Plus only
19
Qwen3.7 Plus only
28
Comparable categories
8 / 8

Pick Qwen3.7 Plus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.6 Plus only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.

Why this result

Qwen3.7 Plus has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 67.22 versus 65.2. 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 mathematics, where it averages 92.9 against 60.5. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 61.6% to 70.3%.

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 Qwen3.6 Plus and Qwen3.7 Plus
CategoryQwen3.6 PlusΔQwen3.7 Plus
MathQwen3.6 Plus60.5Margin 32.4Qwen3.7 Plus92.9
ReasoningQwen3.6 Plus62.0Margin 29.7Qwen3.7 Plus91.7
AgenticQwen3.6 Plus61.6Margin 10.1Qwen3.7 Plus71.7
CodingQwen3.6 Plus70.3Margin 5.3Qwen3.7 Plus75.6
KnowledgeQwen3.6 Plus57.1Margin 3.0Qwen3.7 Plus60.1
Inst. FollowingQwen3.6 Plus82.3Margin 2.2Qwen3.7 Plus84.5
MultimodalQwen3.6 Plus79.8Margin 1.7Qwen3.7 Plus81.5
MultilingualQwen3.6 Plus84.7Margin 0.7Qwen3.7 Plus85.4

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · Qwen3.6 PlusB · Qwen3.7 Plus
  1. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 61.6%B 70.3%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 8.7
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Qwen3.6 Plus scored 61.6%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 70.3%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark.
  2. HLE

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 28.8%B 34.7%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 5.9
    HLE: Qwen3.6 Plus scored 28.8%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 34.7%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark.
  3. HMMT Feb 2026

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 87.8%B 92.9%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 5.1
    HMMT Feb 2026: Qwen3.6 Plus scored 87.8%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 92.9%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark.
  4. CharXiv

    Multimodal
    Source ↗
    A 81.5%B 85.9%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 4.4
    CharXiv: Qwen3.6 Plus scored 81.5%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 85.9%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark.
  5. IFBench

    Inst. Following
    Source ↗
    A 75.8%B 79.1%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 3.3
    IFBench: Qwen3.6 Plus scored 75.8%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 79.1%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricQwen3.6 PlusQwen3.7 PlusComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensQwen3.6 PlusNot availableQwen3.7 PlusNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondQwen3.6 PlusNot availableQwen3.7 PlusNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenQwen3.6 PlusNot availableQwen3.7 PlusNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensQwen3.6 Plus1MQwen3.7 Plus1MListed context windows are equal.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkQwen3.6 PlusQwen3.7 PlusResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 61.6%70.3%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Claw-EvalSource 58.8%62.7%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
QwenClawBenchSource 57.2%61.8%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
τ³-bench resultsSource 70.7%Not comparable
VITA-BenchSource 44.3%45.6%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
DeepPlanningSource 41.5%62.3%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
ToolathlonSource 39.8%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 48.2%73.2%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
MCP-TasksSource 74.1%Not comparable
WideResearchSource 74.3%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 27.6%20.8%Qwen3.6 Plus leads
τ²-bench resultsSource 97.7%93%Qwen3.6 Plus leads
GDPval-AASource 31.8%21.8%Qwen3.6 Plus leads
GDPval-AASource 1135936Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Gert LabsSource 50.60%Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource 18.0%Not comparable
QwenWebBenchSource 1536Not comparable
BFCL v4Source 72.9%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 73.3%Not comparable
AndroidWorldSource 81.0%Not comparable
APEX-Agents-AASource 22.4%Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source 2.8%Not comparable
CodingQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkQwen3.6 PlusQwen3.7 PlusResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 78.8%77.7%Qwen3.6 Plus leads
SWE-bench ProSource 56.6%57.6%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
SWE MultilingualSource 73.8%75.8%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
LiveCodeBench v6Source 87.1%Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource 25.56%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 54.5%55.9%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-SciCodeSource 40.7%45.5%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 70.3%Not comparable
NL2RepoSource 41.1%Not comparable
SciCodeSource 51.3%Not comparable
LiveCodeBenchSource 89.6%Not comparable
ReasoningQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkQwen3.6 PlusQwen3.7 PlusResult
AI-NeedleSource 68.3%Not comparable
LongBench v2Source 62%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 69.7%65.0%Qwen3.6 Plus leads
CritPtSource 2.9%9.1%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
MRCRv2Source 91.7%Not comparable
KnowledgeQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkQwen3.6 PlusQwen3.7 PlusResult
GPQASource 90.4%90.3%Qwen3.6 Plus leads
SuperGPQASource 71.6%71.4%Qwen3.6 Plus leads
MMLU-ProSource 88.5%88.5%Tie
MMLU-ReduxSource 94.5%94.5%Tie
C-EvalSource 93.3%Not comparable
HLESource 28.8%34.7%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 39.6%39.0%Qwen3.6 Plus leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 88.2%90.0%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-HLESource 25.7%33.4%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 2.7%2.4%Qwen3.6 Plus leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 26.2%22.2%Qwen3.6 Plus leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 32.0%25.5%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
GPQA-DSource 90.3%Not comparable
MMMLUSource 89.0%Not comparable
MathQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkQwen3.6 PlusQwen3.7 PlusResult
AIME26Source 95.3%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2025Source 96.7%Not comparable
HMMT Nov 2025Source 94.6%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source 87.8%92.9%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
MMAnswerBenchSource 83.8%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 26.207%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 8.333%Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource 86.0%Not comparable
ApexSource 22.7%Not comparable
MultilingualQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkQwen3.6 PlusQwen3.7 PlusResult
MMLU-ProXSource 84.7%85.4%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
NOVA-63Source 57.9%58.8%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
INCLUDESource 83.0%Not comparable
MAXIFESource 88.8%Not comparable
PolyMathSource 84.0%Not comparable
MultimodalQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkQwen3.6 PlusQwen3.7 PlusResult
MMMUSource 86.0%Not comparable
MMMU-ProSource 78.8%79%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
MathVisionSource 88.0%90.3%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
VideoMMMUSource 84.0%85.4%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
ScreenSpot ProSource 68.2%79.0%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
CharXivSource 81.5%85.9%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
V*Source 96.9%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 78.0%80.5%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Design Arena WebsiteSource 12491288Qwen3.7 Plus leads
ERQASource 69.8%Not comparable
MedXpertQA (MM)Source 71.0%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
MLVU (M-Avg)Source 87.4%Not comparable
Inst. FollowingQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkQwen3.6 PlusQwen3.7 PlusResult
IFEvalSource 94.3%94.6%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
IFBenchSource 75.8%79.1%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-IFBenchSource 75.2%78.0%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Frequently Asked Questions (9)

Which is better, Qwen3.6 Plus or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 67.22 to 65.2. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 61.6% and 70.3%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Qwen3.6 Plus or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 60.1 versus 57.1. Inside this category, AA-HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, Qwen3.6 Plus or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 75.6 versus 70.3. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, Qwen3.6 Plus or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 92.9 versus 60.5. Inside this category, HMMT Feb 2026 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for reasoning, Qwen3.6 Plus or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 91.7 versus 62. Inside this category, CritPt is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Qwen3.6 Plus or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 71.7 versus 61.6. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Qwen3.6 Plus or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.5 versus 79.8. Inside this category, Design Arena Website is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for instruction following, Qwen3.6 Plus or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 84.5 versus 82.3. Inside this category, IFBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multilingual tasks, Qwen3.6 Plus or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for multilingual tasks in this comparison, averaging 85.4 versus 84.7. Inside this category, NOVA-63 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

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.