Model comparison
GPT-6 Astra vs Qwen3.7 Plus
GPT-6 Astra is the stronger model overall, scoring 70.3 to 45.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.7 Plus costs 29× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-6 Astra's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 28 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 28 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-6 Astra scores higher in 9 categories and Qwen3.7 Plus in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-6 Astra leads 85.1 to 38.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Mystery Game Puzzles: 84% for GPT-6 Astra and 17% for Qwen3.7 Plus.
- Qwen3.7 Plus is cheaper at $0.40 / $1.60 per million input/output tokens, against $10 / $50 for GPT-6 Astra.
- GPT-6 Astra accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
Side by side
| GPT-6 Astra | Qwen3.7 Plus | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 70.3 | 45.0 |
| Released | 2026-09-03 | 2026-06-02 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Max output | 128K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $10 | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $50 | $1.60 |
| Results tracked | 51 | 32 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-6 Astra leads
GPT-6 Astra: 70.5 (#3), Qwen3.7 Plus: 36.1 (#200)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Astra | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierCode | 53.3% | 10.2% |
| SciCode | 56.5% | 45.5% |
| LMArena Coding | 1488 | 1473 |
| DeepSWE | 74.1% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1792 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 65.5% | — |
| WeirdML | 93.6% | — |
| MirrorCode | 46.7% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 2,951 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use GPT-6 Astra leads
GPT-6 Astra: 52.3 (#3), Qwen3.7 Plus: 21.2 (#130)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Astra | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 64.7% | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 | — | 2.8% |
| Remote Labor Index | 20.8% | — |
| BALROG | 68.3% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 15,515 | — |
Reasoning GPT-6 Astra leads
GPT-6 Astra: 85.1 (#1), Qwen3.7 Plus: 38.4 (#54)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Astra | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 98.1% | 74.8% |
| CritPt | 31.7% | 9.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | 72% | 24% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1464 | 1460 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 84% | 17% |
| DTBench | 97.3% | 84% |
| LMCA | 64.4% | 37.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 166.6 | 147.39 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 95% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 98.5% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 76.2% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.14 | — |
Math GPT-6 Astra leads
GPT-6 Astra: 93.4 (#1), Qwen3.7 Plus: 49.3 (#47)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Astra | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 93.7% | 34.4% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | 93.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1463 | 1467 |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 97.6% | — |
| ProofBench | 99% | — |
| FrontierMath Erdős | 2.9% | — |
Knowledge GPT-6 Astra leads
GPT-6 Astra: 75.3 (#1), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.9 (#46)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Astra | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 95.8% | 87.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1486 | 1467 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 54.8% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 75.6% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 8.7% | — |
Multimodal GPT-6 Astra leads
GPT-6 Astra: 55.1 (#3), Qwen3.7 Plus: 41.2 (#30)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Astra | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1280 | 1281 |
| LMArena Document | 1468 | 1444 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 49.7% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 80% | — |
Multilingual Qwen3.7 Plus leads
GPT-6 Astra: 54.0 (#53), Qwen3.7 Plus: 55.0 (#36)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Astra | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1431 | 1445 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1495 | 1510 |
| LMArena French | 1467 | 1471 |
| LMArena Russian | 1434 | 1457 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1412 | 1453 |
| LMArena German | — | 1471 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1411 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1416 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
GPT-6 Astra: 76.6 (#37), Qwen3.7 Plus: 75.9 (#49)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Astra | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1454 | 1439 |
Long Context Too close to call
GPT-6 Astra: 44.7 (#57), Qwen3.7 Plus: 44.5 (#61)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Astra | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1460 | 1454 |
Writing & Preference GPT-6 Astra leads
GPT-6 Astra: 75.7 (#7), Qwen3.7 Plus: 64.5 (#54)
| Benchmark | GPT-6 Astra | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1443 | 1454 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1423 | 1439 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1457 | 1459 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2173 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-6 Astra better than Qwen3.7 Plus?
GPT-6 Astra is the stronger model overall, scoring 70.3 to 45.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.7 Plus costs 29× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-6 Astra's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-6 Astra 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; GPT-6 Astra lists at $10 and $50.
Is GPT-6 Astra or Qwen3.7 Plus better for coding?
GPT-6 Astra scores higher on coding benchmarks: 70.5 versus 36.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-6 Astra does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do GPT-6 Astra and Qwen3.7 Plus share?
28 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-6 Astra has 51 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Plus has 32.