Model comparison
Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs Qwen3.6 Plus
Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 39.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3.7 Sonnet scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.6 Plus in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 Plus leads 56.1 to 39.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 57.8% for Claude 3.7 Sonnet and 93.3% for Qwen3.6 Plus.
Side by side
| Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen3.6 Plus | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 39.5 | 47.5 |
| Released | 2025-02-24 | 2026-03-31 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 1M |
| Max output | — | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $3 |
| Results tracked | 58 | 37 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 40.6 (#136), Qwen3.6 Plus: 40.8 (#130)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 61% | 57.9% |
| LMArena Coding | 1361 | 1467 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 52.8% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 64.9% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1461 |
| SciCode | — | 40.7% |
| GSO | 3.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 74.5% | — |
| CadEval | 54% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 670.15 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 34.1 (#50), Qwen3.6 Plus: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 30.9% | — |
| Cybench | 20% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 43.6% | — |
| OSWorld | 35.8% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 60% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 5,115 |
Reasoning Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 18.6 (#277), Qwen3.6 Plus: 29.3 (#93)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1333 | 1449 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 141.16 | 147.65 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0.9% | — |
| SimpleBench | 46.4% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 60.3% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 28.6% | — |
| CritPt | — | 2.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 17% |
| EnigmaEval | 4.2% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 59.5% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 87.8% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 12% |
| DTBench | — | 81.9% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 74% | — |
| LMCA | — | 33.1% |
| ForecastBench | 61.8 | — |
| LiveBench | 76.1% | — |
Math Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 37.5 (#153), Qwen3.6 Plus: 51.8 (#54)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 57.8% | 93.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1337 | 1450 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.1% | 26.2% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 38.2% |
| Omni-MATH | 33% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 79% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 91.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 8.3% |
Knowledge Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 39.8 (#130), Qwen3.6 Plus: 56.1 (#45)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 79.7% | 88.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1321 | 1454 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 44.1% |
| MMLU-Pro | 78.4% | — |
| Confabulations | 14.7% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 60.8% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 33.7 (#95), Qwen3.6 Plus: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1169 | — |
| GeoBench | 68% | — |
| VPCT | 39% | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 33.9% | — |
Multilingual Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 44.1 (#179), Qwen3.6 Plus: 53.3 (#70)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1296 | 1424 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1299 | 1477 |
| LMArena French | 1303 | 1455 |
| LMArena German | 1301 | 1452 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1267 | 1389 |
| LMArena Korean | 1249 | 1379 |
| LMArena Russian | 1311 | 1434 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1298 | 1432 |
Instruction Following Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 72.9 (#125), Qwen3.6 Plus: 75.0 (#74)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1352 | 1425 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 81.3% | — |
| IFEval | 83.4% | — |
Long Context Claude 3.7 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 50.3 (#10), Qwen3.6 Plus: 45.2 (#49)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1373 | 1439 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 83.3% | — |
| CL-bench | — | 20.3% |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Claude 3.7 Sonnet: 54.4 (#150), Qwen3.6 Plus: 62.2 (#82)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1314 | 1437 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1332 | 1404 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1339 | 1438 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 81.1% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1412 | — |
| WildBench | 81.4% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 59.9% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 3.7 Sonnet better than Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 39.5 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude 3.7 Sonnet or Qwen3.6 Plus better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (40.6 vs 40.8); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do Claude 3.7 Sonnet and Qwen3.6 Plus share?
22 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3.7 Sonnet has 58 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Plus has 37.