Noometry

Model comparison

Gemini 1.0 Pro vs Qwen3.7 Max

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.4 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

Gemini 1.0 Pro Google

27.1

Rank #327 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

51.4

Rank #35 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 1.0 Pro scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.7 Max in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.7 Max leads 62.3 to 8.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 1.1% for Gemini 1.0 Pro and 95.6% for Qwen3.7 Max.

Side by side

Gemini 1.0 ProQwen3.7 Max
ProviderGoogleAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index27.151.4
Released2023-12-132026-05-19
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$2.50
Output $ / M tokens—$7.50
Results tracked2433

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.7 Max leads

Gemini 1.0 Pro: 31.6 (#270), Qwen3.7 Max: 50.2 (#43)

BenchmarkGemini 1.0 ProQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Coding11081498
SWE-bench Verified—77.3%
LMArena WebDev—1515
SciCode—48.8%
ALE-Bench—1,189
HumanEval+55.5%—
MBPP+61.4%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemini 1.0 Pro: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 21.8 (#129)

BenchmarkGemini 1.0 ProQwen3.7 Max
GBAEval—0.4%

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Max leads

Gemini 1.0 Pro: 16.4 (#292), Qwen3.7 Max: 48.4 (#36)

BenchmarkGemini 1.0 ProQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Hard Prompts11091483
DTBench45.9%92.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index116.97153.74
SimpleBench—70.4%
NYT Connections (extended)—85.1%
CritPt—13.4%
Chess Puzzles—19%
EBR-Bench—9.5%
Mystery Game Puzzles—32%
LMCA—44%

Math Qwen3.7 Max leads

Gemini 1.0 Pro: 8.7 (#315), Qwen3.7 Max: 62.3 (#26)

BenchmarkGemini 1.0 ProQwen3.7 Max
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.1%95.6%
LMArena Math11321488
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—64.6%
FrontierMath Tier 4—34.1%
ProofBench—26%
MATH Level 511.2%—

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Max leads

Gemini 1.0 Pro: 15.5 (#286), Qwen3.7 Max: 61.7 (#24)

BenchmarkGemini 1.0 ProQwen3.7 Max
GPQA Diamond34%90.9%
LMArena Expert10591488
SimpleQA Verified—55.8%
MMLU70%—

Multilingual Qwen3.7 Max leads

Gemini 1.0 Pro: 33.5 (#247), Qwen3.7 Max: 57.1 (#13)

BenchmarkGemini 1.0 ProQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Non-English11381475
LMArena Chinese11241533
LMArena Russian11861482
LMArena French1144—
LMArena German1125—
LMArena Japanese1023—
LMArena Spanish1118—

Instruction Following Qwen3.7 Max leads

Gemini 1.0 Pro: 57.9 (#262), Qwen3.7 Max: 76.9 (#34)

BenchmarkGemini 1.0 ProQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Instruction Following11141460

Long Context Qwen3.7 Max leads

Gemini 1.0 Pro: 34.3 (#244), Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#34)

BenchmarkGemini 1.0 ProQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Longer Query11321484

Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Max leads

Gemini 1.0 Pro: 36.2 (#259), Qwen3.7 Max: 65.2 (#52)

BenchmarkGemini 1.0 ProQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Text11491476
LMArena Creative Writing11301450
LMArena Multi-Turn11391482
EQ-Bench 4—1110

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemini 1.0 Pro better than Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.4 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is Gemini 1.0 Pro or Qwen3.7 Max better for coding?

Qwen3.7 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.2 versus 31.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Gemini 1.0 Pro and Qwen3.7 Max share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 1.0 Pro has 24 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Max has 33.

Related comparisons

Go deeper