Model comparison
Llama 4 Maverick vs Qwen3.7 Max
Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 30.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 4 Maverick costs 12× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.
Meta
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 4 Maverick scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.7 Max in 8 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.7 Max leads 49.2 to 10.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 8% for Llama 4 Maverick and 85.1% for Qwen3.7 Max.
- Llama 4 Maverick is cheaper at $0.19 / $0.65 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $7.50 for Qwen3.7 Max.
- Qwen3.7 Max accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
- Llama 4 Maverick has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Llama 4 Maverick | Qwen3.7 Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 30.9 | 51.5 |
| Released | 2025-04-05 | 2026-05-19 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 128K | 1M |
| Max output | 4K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.19 | $2.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.65 | $7.50 |
| Results tracked | 54 | 33 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.7 Max leads
Llama 4 Maverick: 26.6 (#324), Qwen3.7 Max: 50.4 (#45)
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Maverick | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 33.1% | 48.8% |
| LMArena Coding | 1302 | 1498 |
| ALE-Bench | 172.97 | 1,189 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 77.3% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 21% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 15.6% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1515 |
| WeirdML | 24.5% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 49.7% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 61.4% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Llama 4 Maverick leads
Llama 4 Maverick: 28.2 (#91), Qwen3.7 Max: 22.1 (#135)
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Maverick | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 37.3% | — |
| GBAEval | — | 0.4% |
Reasoning Qwen3.7 Max leads
Llama 4 Maverick: 10.1 (#342), Qwen3.7 Max: 49.2 (#38)
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Maverick | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 27.7% | 70.4% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 8% | 85.1% |
| CritPt | 0% | 13.4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1281 | 1483 |
| DTBench | 61.9% | 92.3% |
| LMCA | 15.9% | 44% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 132.2 | 153.68 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 55.9% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 4.4% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 19% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.6% | — |
| EBR-Bench | — | 9.5% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 32% |
| ForecastBench | 57.5 | — |
Math Qwen3.7 Max leads
Llama 4 Maverick: 26.0 (#262), Qwen3.7 Max: 62.4 (#32)
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Maverick | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 20.6% | 95.6% |
| LMArena Math | 1299 | 1490 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 64.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 34.1% |
| ProofBench | — | 26% |
| Omni-MATH | 42.2% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 73% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 0.7% | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.7 Max leads
Llama 4 Maverick: 33.4 (#204), Qwen3.7 Max: 61.6 (#28)
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Maverick | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 67% | 90.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1259 | 1488 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 5.7% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 55.8% |
| MMLU-Pro | 81% | — |
| Confabulations | 22.6% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 8.2% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 65% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Llama 4 Maverick: 31.6 (#105), Qwen3.7 Max: —
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Maverick | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1142 | — |
| GeoBench | 52% | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 31.8% | — |
Multilingual Qwen3.7 Max leads
Llama 4 Maverick: 42.2 (#195), Qwen3.7 Max: 56.9 (#15)
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Maverick | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1269 | 1474 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1277 | 1530 |
| LMArena Russian | 1286 | 1484 |
| LMArena French | 1259 | — |
| LMArena German | 1291 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1207 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1203 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1293 | — |
Instruction Following Qwen3.7 Max leads
Llama 4 Maverick: 71.7 (#146), Qwen3.7 Max: 76.7 (#38)
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Maverick | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1267 | 1460 |
| IFEval | 90.8% | — |
Long Context Qwen3.7 Max leads
Llama 4 Maverick: 31.4 (#279), Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#40)
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Maverick | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1280 | 1482 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 46.2% | — |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Max leads
Llama 4 Maverick: 38.8 (#252), Qwen3.7 Max: 65.0 (#54)
| Benchmark | Llama 4 Maverick | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1287 | 1476 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1267 | 1449 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1289 | 1481 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 62% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 860 | — |
| WildBench | 80% | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1110 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 4 Maverick better than Qwen3.7 Max?
Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 30.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 4 Maverick costs 12× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Llama 4 Maverick or Qwen3.7 Max?
Llama 4 Maverick is cheaper. It lists at $0.19 per million input tokens and $0.65 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Max lists at $2.50 and $7.50.
Is Llama 4 Maverick or Qwen3.7 Max better for coding?
Qwen3.7 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.4 versus 26.6 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.7 Max does, with 1M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Llama 4 Maverick and Qwen3.7 Max share?
22 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 4 Maverick has 54 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Max has 33.