Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Qwen3.7 Max

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 50.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 29 shared benchmarks.

Claude Sonnet 4.6 Anthropic

50.3

Rank #50 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

51.5

Rank #42 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 29 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3.7 Max in 6 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads 39.1 to 22.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GBAEval: 48.8% for Claude Sonnet 4.6 and 0.4% for Qwen3.7 Max.
  • Qwen3.7 Max is cheaper at $2.50 / $7.50 per million input/output tokens, against $3 / $15 for Claude Sonnet 4.6.

Side by side

Claude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3.7 Max
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index50.351.5
Released2026-02-172026-05-19
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1M
Max output128K131K
Input $ / M tokens$3$2.50
Output $ / M tokens$15$7.50
Results tracked5733

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.7 Max leads

Claude Sonnet 4.6: 46.3 (#67), Qwen3.7 Max: 50.4 (#45)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3.7 Max
SWE-bench Verified75.2%77.3%
LMArena WebDev15221515
SciCode46.8%48.8%
LMArena Coding15041498
ALE-Bench1,3271,189
DeepSWE29.9%—
FrontierCode24.3%—
WeirdML66.1%—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.6: 39.1 (#28), Qwen3.7 Max: 22.1 (#135)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3.7 Max
GBAEval48.8%0.4%
Terminal-Bench53.4%—
APEX-Agents43%—
OSWorld 2.09.3%—
DeepResearch Bench54.9%—
OSWorld72.1%—
ExploitBench23.6%—
GDP.pdf18%—
LMArena Search1221—
Vending-Bench 27,204—

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Max leads

Claude Sonnet 4.6: 46.1 (#45), Qwen3.7 Max: 49.2 (#38)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3.7 Max
NYT Connections (extended)80.9%85.1%
CritPt3.1%13.4%
Chess Puzzles13%19%
LMArena Hard Prompts14841483
Mystery Game Puzzles16%32%
DTBench89.9%92.3%
LMCA46.5%44%
Epoch Capabilities Index152.24153.68
ARC-AGI-260.4%—
SimpleBench—70.4%
ARC-AGI-186.5%—
Thematic Generalization76.3%—
EBR-Bench—9.5%
ForecastBench62—

Math Qwen3.7 Max leads

Claude Sonnet 4.6: 52.9 (#49), Qwen3.7 Max: 62.4 (#32)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3.7 Max
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202585.8%95.6%
ProofBench45%26%
LMArena Math14621490
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—64.6%
FrontierMath Tier 4—34.1%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)32.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)8.3%—

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Max leads

Claude Sonnet 4.6: 51.7 (#65), Qwen3.7 Max: 61.6 (#28)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3.7 Max
GPQA Diamond87.4%90.9%
SimpleQA Verified35.5%55.8%
LMArena Expert15001488
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.6%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4.6: 38.0 (#68), Qwen3.7 Max: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Vision1283—
Blueprint-Bench 26.7%—
LMArena Document1482—

Multilingual Qwen3.7 Max leads

Claude Sonnet 4.6: 54.4 (#41), Qwen3.7 Max: 56.9 (#15)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Non-English14401474
LMArena Chinese14911530
LMArena Russian14401484
LMArena French1465—
LMArena German1428—
LMArena Japanese1420—
LMArena Korean1411—
LMArena Spanish1464—

Instruction Following Too close to call

Claude Sonnet 4.6: 77.4 (#25), Qwen3.7 Max: 76.7 (#38)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Instruction Following14751460

Long Context Too close to call

Claude Sonnet 4.6: 45.3 (#44), Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#40)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Longer Query14791482

Writing & Preference Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.6: 70.2 (#22), Qwen3.7 Max: 65.0 (#54)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Text14581476
LMArena Creative Writing14351449
EQ-Bench 412071110
LMArena Multi-Turn14641481
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1810—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Sonnet 4.6 better than Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 50.3 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max is cheaper. It lists at $2.50 per million input tokens and $7.50 per million output tokens; Claude Sonnet 4.6 lists at $3 and $15.

Is Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Qwen3.7 Max better for coding?

Qwen3.7 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.4 versus 46.3 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 1M tokens.

How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Qwen3.7 Max share?

29 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 4.6 has 57 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Max has 33.

Related comparisons

Go deeper