Model comparison

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct vs Qwen3.7 Max

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct IBM

32.4

Rank #258 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

51.5

Rank #42 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.1 8b Instruct scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.7 Max in 8 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.7 Max leads 61.6 to 31.1.
  • Granite 3.1 8b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct and Qwen3.7 Max specifications
Granite 3.1 8b InstructQwen3.7 Max
ProviderIBMAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index32.451.5
Released—2026-05-19
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$2.50
Output $ / M tokens—$7.50
Results tracked1333

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.7 Max leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 34.5 (#233), Qwen3.7 Max: 50.4 (#45)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Coding11861498
SWE-bench Verified—77.3%
LMArena WebDev—1515
SciCode—48.8%
ALE-Bench—1,189

Agentic & Tool Use Granite 3.1 8b Instruct leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 24.1 (#120), Qwen3.7 Max: 22.1 (#135)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructQwen3.7 Max
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard27.1%—
GBAEval—0.4%

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Max leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 22.1 (#207), Qwen3.7 Max: 49.2 (#38)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Hard Prompts11451483
SimpleBench—70.4%
NYT Connections (extended)—85.1%
CritPt—13.4%
Chess Puzzles—19%
EBR-Bench—9.5%
Mystery Game Puzzles—32%
DTBench—92.3%
LMCA—44%
Epoch Capabilities Index—153.68

Math Qwen3.7 Max leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 33.0 (#209), Qwen3.7 Max: 62.4 (#32)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Math11521490
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—64.6%
FrontierMath Tier 4—34.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—95.6%
ProofBench—26%

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Max leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 31.1 (#220), Qwen3.7 Max: 61.6 (#28)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Expert11421488
GPQA Diamond—90.9%
SimpleQA Verified—55.8%

Multilingual Qwen3.7 Max leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 30.9 (#260), Qwen3.7 Max: 56.9 (#15)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Non-English10991474
LMArena Chinese11451530
LMArena Russian10921484

Instruction Following Qwen3.7 Max leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 58.6 (#259), Qwen3.7 Max: 76.7 (#38)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Instruction Following11311460

Long Context Qwen3.7 Max leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.2 (#241), Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#40)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Longer Query11621482

Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Max leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.5 (#266), Qwen3.7 Max: 65.0 (#54)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Text11501476
LMArena Creative Writing11291449
LMArena Multi-Turn11081481
EQ-Bench 4—1110

Frequently asked questions

Is Granite 3.1 8b Instruct better than Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Granite 3.1 8b Instruct or Qwen3.7 Max better for coding?

Qwen3.7 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.4 versus 34.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 8b Instruct and Qwen3.7 Max share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 8b Instruct has 13 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Max has 33.

Related comparisons

Go deeper