Noometry

Model comparison

Inkling vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 44.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 27 shared benchmarks.

Inkling Thinking Machines Lab

44.1

Rank #80 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

45.3

Rank #72 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 27 benchmarks with published results for both. Inkling scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen3.7 Plus in 5 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.7 Plus leads 50.5 to 31.3.
  • Qwen3.7 Plus is cheaper at $0.40 / $1.60 per million input/output tokens, against $1.87 / $4.68 for Inkling.
  • Qwen3.7 Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 66K.
  • Inkling has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

InklingQwen3.7 Plus
ProviderThinking Machines LabAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index44.145.3
Released2026-07-152026-06-02
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window66K1M
Max output66K131K
Input $ / M tokens$1.87$0.40
Output $ / M tokens$4.68$1.60
Results tracked4132

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Inkling: 34.5 (#234), Qwen3.7 Plus: 36.6 (#206)

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Plus
FrontierCode14%10.2%
SciCode47%45.5%
LMArena Coding14641473
LMArena WebDev1413—
FrontierSWE4.1%—
WeirdML32.3%—
ALE-Bench946—

Agentic & Tool Use Inkling leads

Inkling: 29.6 (#85), Qwen3.7 Plus: 21.4 (#138)

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Plus
APEX-Agents33.8%—
OSWorld 2.0—2.8%
τ²-bench Banking25%—

Reasoning Inkling leads

Inkling: 40.4 (#56), Qwen3.7 Plus: 39.3 (#59)

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Plus
CritPt5.4%9.1%
Chess Puzzles21%24%
LMArena Hard Prompts14511460
DTBench87.5%84%
LMCA37.6%37.6%
Epoch Capabilities Index148.54147.37
ARC-AGI-236.5%—
SimpleBench50%—
NYT Connections (extended)—74.8%
ARC-AGI-179.5%—
Mystery Game Puzzles—17%

Math Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Inkling: 31.3 (#225), Qwen3.7 Plus: 50.5 (#56)

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Plus
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)33.3%34.4%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202588.9%93.3%
LMArena Math14791466
FrontierMath Tier 44.9%—
ProofBench0%—

Knowledge Too close to call

Inkling: 55.1 (#49), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.9 (#51)

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Plus
GPQA Diamond88.3%87.9%
LMArena Expert14651467
SimpleQA Verified40.3%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Inkling: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 41.8 (#33)

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Vision—1279
LMArena Document—1444

Multilingual Too close to call

Inkling: 54.0 (#52), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.8 (#38)

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Non-English14341445
LMArena Chinese14901510
LMArena French14581473
LMArena German14461471
LMArena Japanese14291413
LMArena Korean14041415
LMArena Russian14291457
LMArena Spanish14481457

Instruction Following Too close to call

Inkling: 75.1 (#71), Qwen3.7 Plus: 75.8 (#52)

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Instruction Following14261440

Long Context Too close to call

Inkling: 43.8 (#86), Qwen3.7 Plus: 44.5 (#65)

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Longer Query14341455

Writing & Preference Too close to call

Inkling: 65.2 (#51), Qwen3.7 Plus: 64.3 (#56)

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text14411455
LMArena Creative Writing13871439
LMArena Multi-Turn14361460
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1611—
EQ-Bench 41226—

Frequently asked questions

Is Inkling better than Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 44.1 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Inkling or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $1.60 per million output tokens; Inkling lists at $1.87 and $4.68.

Is Inkling or Qwen3.7 Plus better for coding?

Qwen3.7 Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.6 versus 34.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.7 Plus does, with 1M tokens against 66K.

How many benchmarks do Inkling and Qwen3.7 Plus share?

27 benchmarks have published results for both models. Inkling has 41 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Plus has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper