Noometry

Model comparison

Inkling vs Qwen3.7 Max

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 44.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 28 shared benchmarks.

Inkling Thinking Machines Lab

44.1

Rank #80 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

51.5

Rank #42 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 28 benchmarks with published results for both. Inkling scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3.7 Max in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.7 Max leads 62.4 to 31.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 33.3% for Inkling and 64.6% for Qwen3.7 Max.
  • Inkling is cheaper at $1.87 / $4.68 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $7.50 for Qwen3.7 Max.
  • Qwen3.7 Max accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 66K.
  • Inkling has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

InklingQwen3.7 Max
ProviderThinking Machines LabAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index44.151.5
Released2026-07-152026-05-19
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window66K1M
Max output66K131K
Input $ / M tokens$1.87$2.50
Output $ / M tokens$4.68$7.50
Results tracked4133

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.7 Max leads

Inkling: 34.5 (#234), Qwen3.7 Max: 50.4 (#45)

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Max
LMArena WebDev14131515
SciCode47%48.8%
LMArena Coding14641498
ALE-Bench9461,189
SWE-bench Verified—77.3%
FrontierCode14%—
FrontierSWE4.1%—
WeirdML32.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Inkling leads

Inkling: 29.6 (#85), Qwen3.7 Max: 22.1 (#135)

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Max
APEX-Agents33.8%—
τ²-bench Banking25%—
GBAEval—0.4%

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Max leads

Inkling: 40.4 (#56), Qwen3.7 Max: 49.2 (#38)

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Max
SimpleBench50%70.4%
CritPt5.4%13.4%
Chess Puzzles21%19%
LMArena Hard Prompts14511483
DTBench87.5%92.3%
LMCA37.6%44%
Epoch Capabilities Index148.54153.68
ARC-AGI-236.5%—
NYT Connections (extended)—85.1%
ARC-AGI-179.5%—
EBR-Bench—9.5%
Mystery Game Puzzles—32%

Math Qwen3.7 Max leads

Inkling: 31.3 (#225), Qwen3.7 Max: 62.4 (#32)

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Max
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)33.3%64.6%
FrontierMath Tier 44.9%34.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202588.9%95.6%
ProofBench0%26%
LMArena Math14791490

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Max leads

Inkling: 55.1 (#49), Qwen3.7 Max: 61.6 (#28)

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Max
GPQA Diamond88.3%90.9%
SimpleQA Verified40.3%55.8%
LMArena Expert14651488

Multilingual Qwen3.7 Max leads

Inkling: 54.0 (#52), Qwen3.7 Max: 56.9 (#15)

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Non-English14341474
LMArena Chinese14901530
LMArena Russian14291484
LMArena French1458—
LMArena German1446—
LMArena Japanese1429—
LMArena Korean1404—
LMArena Spanish1448—

Instruction Following Qwen3.7 Max leads

Inkling: 75.1 (#71), Qwen3.7 Max: 76.7 (#38)

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Instruction Following14261460

Long Context Qwen3.7 Max leads

Inkling: 43.8 (#86), Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#40)

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Longer Query14341482

Writing & Preference Too close to call

Inkling: 65.2 (#51), Qwen3.7 Max: 65.0 (#54)

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Text14411476
LMArena Creative Writing13871449
EQ-Bench 412261110
LMArena Multi-Turn14361481
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1611—

Frequently asked questions

Is Inkling better than Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 44.1 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Inkling or Qwen3.7 Max?

Inkling is cheaper. It lists at $1.87 per million input tokens and $4.68 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Max lists at $2.50 and $7.50.

Is Inkling 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.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.7 Max does, with 1M tokens against 66K.

How many benchmarks do Inkling and Qwen3.7 Max share?

28 benchmarks have published results for both models. Inkling has 41 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Max has 33.

Related comparisons

Go deeper