Noometry

Model comparison

DBRX vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

DBRX Databricks

29.4

Rank #311 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

45.3

Rank #72 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. DBRX scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.7 Plus in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.7 Plus leads 54.9 to 14.9.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 32.9% for DBRX and 87.9% for Qwen3.7 Plus.
  • DBRX has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

DBRXQwen3.7 Plus
ProviderDatabricksAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index29.445.3
Released2024-03-272026-06-02
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.40
Output $ / M tokens—$1.60
Results tracked2132

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.7 Plus leads

DBRX: 32.9 (#266), Qwen3.7 Plus: 36.6 (#206)

BenchmarkDBRXQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Coding11321473
FrontierCode—10.2%
SciCode—45.5%
HumanEval+70.1%—
MBPP+55.8%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

DBRX: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 21.4 (#138)

BenchmarkDBRXQwen3.7 Plus
OSWorld 2.0—2.8%

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Plus leads

DBRX: 21.4 (#222), Qwen3.7 Plus: 39.3 (#59)

BenchmarkDBRXQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Hard Prompts11131460
NYT Connections (extended)—74.8%
CritPt—9.1%
Chess Puzzles—24%
Mystery Game Puzzles—17%
DTBench—84%
LMCA—37.6%
Epoch Capabilities Index—147.37

Math Qwen3.7 Plus leads

DBRX: 24.3 (#269), Qwen3.7 Plus: 50.5 (#56)

BenchmarkDBRXQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Math11451466
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—34.4%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—93.3%
MATH Level 511.7%—

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Plus leads

DBRX: 14.9 (#294), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.9 (#51)

BenchmarkDBRXQwen3.7 Plus
GPQA Diamond32.9%87.9%
LMArena Expert10761467

Multimodal Not comparable

DBRX: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 41.8 (#33)

BenchmarkDBRXQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Vision—1279
LMArena Document—1444

Multilingual Qwen3.7 Plus leads

DBRX: 29.3 (#268), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.8 (#38)

BenchmarkDBRXQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Non-English10711445
LMArena Chinese10681510
LMArena French10961473
LMArena German10571471
LMArena Japanese9901413
LMArena Korean9931415
LMArena Russian10781457
LMArena Spanish10641457

Instruction Following Qwen3.7 Plus leads

DBRX: 57.5 (#270), Qwen3.7 Plus: 75.8 (#52)

BenchmarkDBRXQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Instruction Following11121440

Long Context Qwen3.7 Plus leads

DBRX: 33.7 (#258), Qwen3.7 Plus: 44.5 (#65)

BenchmarkDBRXQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Longer Query11121455

Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Plus leads

DBRX: 33.6 (#275), Qwen3.7 Plus: 64.3 (#56)

BenchmarkDBRXQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text11191455
LMArena Creative Writing11041439
LMArena Multi-Turn11111460

Frequently asked questions

Is DBRX better than Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is DBRX or Qwen3.7 Plus better for coding?

Qwen3.7 Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.6 versus 32.9 in the Noometry coding category.

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

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. DBRX has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Plus has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper