Noometry

Model comparison

Qwen3.7 Max vs Qwen3.8 Max

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 51.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 27 shared benchmarks.

Qwen3.7 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

51.5

Rank #42 Confirmed

Qwen3.8 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

56.8

Rank #22 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 27 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen3.7 Max scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.8 Max in 8 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where Qwen3.8 Max leads 45.4 to 22.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 26% for Qwen3.7 Max and 58% for Qwen3.8 Max.
  • Qwen3.8 Max is cheaper at $2 / $6 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $7.50 for Qwen3.7 Max.

Side by side

Qwen3.7 MaxQwen3.8 Max
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index51.556.8
Released2026-05-192026-08-02
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1M
Max output131K131K
Input $ / M tokens$2.50$2
Output $ / M tokens$7.50$6
Results tracked3339

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen3.7 Max: 50.4 (#45), Qwen3.8 Max: 53.5 (#29)

BenchmarkQwen3.7 MaxQwen3.8 Max
LMArena WebDev15151674
SciCode48.8%53.2%
LMArena Coding14981502
SWE-bench Verified77.3%—
DeepSWE—57.5%
FrontierSWE—17.8%
ALE-Bench1,189—

Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen3.7 Max: 22.1 (#135), Qwen3.8 Max: 45.4 (#14)

BenchmarkQwen3.7 MaxQwen3.8 Max
APEX-Agents—63.3%
τ²-bench Banking—55.1%
GBAEval0.4%—
GDP.pdf—23.2%

Reasoning Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen3.7 Max: 49.2 (#38), Qwen3.8 Max: 54.4 (#26)

BenchmarkQwen3.7 MaxQwen3.8 Max
NYT Connections (extended)85.1%88.3%
CritPt13.4%20%
Chess Puzzles19%40%
LMArena Hard Prompts14831496
Mystery Game Puzzles32%38%
DTBench92.3%92%
LMCA44%46.2%
Epoch Capabilities Index153.68156.41
SimpleBench70.4%—
EBR-Bench9.5%—

Math Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen3.7 Max: 62.4 (#32), Qwen3.8 Max: 73.2 (#20)

BenchmarkQwen3.7 MaxQwen3.8 Max
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)64.6%74.7%
FrontierMath Tier 434.1%46.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202595.6%100%
ProofBench26%58%
LMArena Math14901499

Knowledge Too close to call

Qwen3.7 Max: 61.6 (#28), Qwen3.8 Max: 61.7 (#27)

BenchmarkQwen3.7 MaxQwen3.8 Max
GPQA Diamond90.9%92.7%
SimpleQA Verified55.8%47.3%
LMArena Expert14881507

Multimodal Not comparable

Qwen3.7 Max: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 37.2 (#75)

BenchmarkQwen3.7 MaxQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Vision—1314
Furniture Assembly—20%

Multilingual Too close to call

Qwen3.7 Max: 56.9 (#15), Qwen3.8 Max: 56.7 (#18)

BenchmarkQwen3.7 MaxQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Non-English14741472
LMArena Chinese15301538
LMArena Russian14841481
LMArena French—1503
LMArena German—1483
LMArena Japanese—1467
LMArena Korean—1461
LMArena Spanish—1492

Instruction Following Too close to call

Qwen3.7 Max: 76.7 (#38), Qwen3.8 Max: 77.6 (#17)

BenchmarkQwen3.7 MaxQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Instruction Following14601479

Long Context Too close to call

Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#40), Qwen3.8 Max: 45.6 (#31)

BenchmarkQwen3.7 MaxQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Longer Query14821489

Writing & Preference Qwen3.8 Max leads

Qwen3.7 Max: 65.0 (#54), Qwen3.8 Max: 67.1 (#30)

BenchmarkQwen3.7 MaxQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Text14761483
LMArena Creative Writing14491479
LMArena Multi-Turn14811489
EQ-Bench 41110—

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen3.7 Max better than Qwen3.8 Max?

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 51.5 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.7 Max or Qwen3.8 Max?

Qwen3.8 Max is cheaper. It lists at $2 per million input tokens and $6 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Max lists at $2.50 and $7.50.

Is Qwen3.7 Max or Qwen3.8 Max better for coding?

Qwen3.8 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.5 versus 50.4 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 1M tokens.

How many benchmarks do Qwen3.7 Max and Qwen3.8 Max share?

27 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3.7 Max has 33 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 Max has 39.

Related comparisons

Go deeper