Model profile
Qwen3 Max
Evidence coverage
14 of 323 tracked benchmarks are published. 2 are verified and 12 provisional. 6 of 8 categories are measured.
- Published / tracked
- 14 / 323
- Verified
- 2
- Provisional
- 12
- Categories with evidence
- 6 / 8
Evidence by category
- Agentic2 benchmarksMixed evidence
- Coding2 benchmarksMixed evidence
- Reasoning2 benchmarksReported
- Knowledge6 benchmarksReported
- Math0 benchmarksNot measured
- Multilingual0 benchmarksNot measured
- Multimodal1 benchmarkReported
- Inst. Following1 benchmarkReported
Qwen3 Max ranks #128 out of 200 models on the public leaderboard with an overall score of 48.16/100. It does not yet have enough sourced coverage for BenchLM's verified leaderboard. While not a frontier model, it offers specific advantages depending on the use case.
Qwen3 Max is a proprietary model with a 1M token context window. It uses explicit chain-of-thought reasoning, which typically improves performance on math and complex reasoning tasks at the cost of higher latency and token usage.
This profile currently has 14 of 323 tracked benchmarks. BenchLM only exposes non-generated benchmark rows publicly, so missing categories stay blank until a sourced evaluation is available.
Peer position
Exact provisional scores and ranks for the closest listed peers. A score can appear before a model clears the evidence threshold for a rank, so equal scores can have different rank states.
Range 47.74–48.54
- Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.1MistralCompare#12548.54Mixtral 8x22B Instruct v0.1 is #125 with a score of 48.54.
- o3-proOpenAICompare#12748.33o3-pro is #127 with a score of 48.33.
- Qwen3 MaxCurrent modelAlibaba#12848.16Qwen3 Max is #128 with a score of 48.16.
- o1OpenAICompare#12948.1o1 is #129 with a score of 48.1.
- Gemini 2.5 FlashGoogleCompare#13048.09Gemini 2.5 Flash is #130 with a score of 48.09.
- o3OpenAICompare#13147.89o3 is #131 with a score of 47.89.
- Claude 3.5 SonnetAnthropicCompare#13247.74Claude 3.5 Sonnet is #132 with a score of 47.74.
Category percentile
More
Relative position among models eligible for each sourced category. A higher percentile means a stronger position within that category's ranked cohort; 100 is highest.
Category evidence
Scores and ranks appear only where this model has published benchmark evidence. Categories without displayable source records remain not measured.
| Category | Score | Rank | Percentile | Weight | Benchmarks | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AgenticWeight 22%2 benchmarksMixed sources | Score pending | Not ranked | Not available | 22% | 2 benchmarks | Mixed sources |
| CodingWeight 20%2 benchmarksMixed sources | Score pending | Not ranked | Not available | 20% | 2 benchmarks | Mixed sources |
| ReasoningWeight 17%2 benchmarksReported | Score pending | Not ranked | Not available | 17% | 2 benchmarks | Reported |
| KnowledgeWeight 12%6 benchmarksReported | Score pending | Not ranked | Not available | 12% | 6 benchmarks | Reported |
| MathWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 5% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 7% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| MultimodalWeight 12%1 benchmarkReported | Score pending | Not ranked | Not available | 12% | 1 benchmark | Reported |
| Inst. FollowingWeight 5%1 benchmarkReported | Score pending | Not ranked | Not available | 5% | 1 benchmark | Reported |
Benchmark Details
Rows below have a displayable published verification record. Each source link and provenance note remains in the page HTML while its category is closed. Source-unverified manual rows and generated rows stay hidden.
Agentic2 benchmarks
τ²-Bench Tool-Agent-User Evaluation
Gert Labs Composite Game Benchmark
Coding2 benchmarks
Vibe Code Bench v1.1
Artificial Analysis SciCode
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Artificial Analysis Long Context Reasoning
Critical Physics Tasks
Knowledge6 benchmarks
Artificial Analysis GPQA Diamond
Artificial Analysis Humanity's Last Exam
Artificial Analysis Omniscience Index
Artificial Analysis Omniscience Accuracy
Artificial Analysis Omniscience Hallucination Rate
Multimodal1 benchmark
Design Arena Website Elo
Inst. Following1 benchmark
Artificial Analysis IFBench
Frequently Asked Questions
How does Qwen3 Max perform overall in AI benchmarks?
Qwen3 Max has 14 published benchmark scores on BenchLM, but it does not yet have enough non-generated coverage to receive a global overall rank.
Is Qwen3 Max good for knowledge and understanding?
Qwen3 Max has visible benchmark coverage in knowledge and understanding, but BenchLM does not currently assign it a global category rank there.
Is Qwen3 Max good for coding and programming?
Qwen3 Max has visible benchmark coverage in coding and programming, but BenchLM does not currently assign it a global category rank there.
Is Qwen3 Max good for reasoning and logic?
Qwen3 Max has visible benchmark coverage in reasoning and logic, but BenchLM does not currently assign it a global category rank there.
Is Qwen3 Max good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?
Qwen3 Max has visible benchmark coverage in agentic tool use and computer tasks, but BenchLM does not currently assign it a global category rank there.
Is Qwen3 Max good for multimodal and grounded tasks?
Qwen3 Max has visible benchmark coverage in multimodal and grounded tasks, but BenchLM does not currently assign it a global category rank there.
Is Qwen3 Max good for instruction following?
Qwen3 Max has visible benchmark coverage in instruction following, but BenchLM does not currently assign it a global category rank there.
Does Qwen3 Max have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?
Not yet. Qwen3 Max currently has 14 published benchmark scores out of the 323 benchmarks BenchLM tracks. BenchLM only exposes non-generated public benchmark rows, so missing categories stay blank until a sourced evaluation is available.
What is the context window size of Qwen3 Max?
Qwen3 Max has a published context window of 1M, which determines how much text it can process in a single interaction.
Related Resources
Choose with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, new releases, pricing changes, and the evidence behind them.
Free. One email per week.