Model comparison

o1-pro vs Qwen3.7 Max

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 31.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

o1-pro OpenAI

31.5

Rank #271 Reported

Qwen3.7 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

51.5

Rank #42 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.7 Max leads 61.6 to 29.7.
  • Qwen3.7 Max is cheaper at $2.50 / $7.50 per million input/output tokens, against $150 / $600 for o1-pro.
  • Qwen3.7 Max accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 200K.

Side by side

o1-pro and Qwen3.7 Max specifications
o1-proQwen3.7 Max
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index31.551.5
Released2025-03-192026-05-19
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window200K1M
Max output100K131K
Input $ / M tokens$150$2.50
Output $ / M tokens$600$7.50
Results tracked333

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

o1-pro: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 50.4 (#45)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.7 Max
SWE-bench Verified—77.3%
LMArena WebDev—1515
SciCode—48.8%
LMArena Coding—1498
ALE-Bench—1,189

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

o1-pro: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 22.1 (#135)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.7 Max
GBAEval—0.4%

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Max leads

o1-pro: 20.4 (#239), Qwen3.7 Max: 49.2 (#38)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.7 Max
SimpleBench—70.4%
NYT Connections (extended)—85.1%
ARC-AGI-123.3%—
CritPt—13.4%
Chess Puzzles—19%
EnigmaEval6.1%—
EBR-Bench—9.5%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1483
Mystery Game Puzzles—32%
DTBench—92.3%
LMCA—44%
Epoch Capabilities Index—153.68

Math Not comparable

o1-pro: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 62.4 (#32)

Math benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.7 Max
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—64.6%
FrontierMath Tier 4—34.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—95.6%
ProofBench—26%
LMArena Math—1490

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Max leads

o1-pro: 29.7 (#234), Qwen3.7 Max: 61.6 (#28)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.7 Max
GPQA Diamond—90.9%
Humanity's Last Exam8.1%—
SimpleQA Verified—55.8%
LMArena Expert—1488

Multilingual Not comparable

o1-pro: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 56.9 (#15)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Non-English—1474
LMArena Chinese—1530
LMArena Russian—1484

Instruction Following Not comparable

o1-pro: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 76.7 (#38)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Instruction Following—1460

Long Context Not comparable

o1-pro: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#40)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Longer Query—1482

Writing & Preference Not comparable

o1-pro: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 65.0 (#54)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Text—1476
LMArena Creative Writing—1449
EQ-Bench 4—1110
LMArena Multi-Turn—1481

Frequently asked questions

Is o1-pro better than Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 31.5 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, o1-pro or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max is cheaper. It lists at $2.50 per million input tokens and $7.50 per million output tokens; o1-pro lists at $150 and $600.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.7 Max does, with 1M tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do o1-pro and Qwen3.7 Max share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. o1-pro has 3 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Max has 33.

Related comparisons

Go deeper