Model comparison

o3-pro vs Qwen3.7 Max

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 42.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

o3-pro OpenAI

42.9

Rank #105 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

51.5

Rank #42 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. o3-pro scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3.7 Max in 3 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.7 Max leads 61.6 to 29.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is LMCA: 38.5% for o3-pro and 44% for Qwen3.7 Max.
  • Qwen3.7 Max is cheaper at $2.50 / $7.50 per million input/output tokens, against $20 / $80 for o3-pro.
  • Qwen3.7 Max accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 200K.

Side by side

o3-pro and Qwen3.7 Max specifications
o3-proQwen3.7 Max
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index42.951.5
Released2025-06-102026-05-19
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window200K1M
Max output100K131K
Input $ / M tokens$20$2.50
Output $ / M tokens$80$7.50
Results tracked1233

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

Category by category

Coding o3-pro leads

o3-pro: 55.5 (#24), Qwen3.7 Max: 50.4 (#45)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmarko3-proQwen3.7 Max
SWE-bench Verified—77.3%
Aider Polyglot84.9%—
LMArena WebDev—1515
SciCode—48.8%
WeirdML58.2%—
LMArena Coding—1498
ALE-Bench—1,189

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

o3-pro: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 22.1 (#135)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmarko3-proQwen3.7 Max
GBAEval—0.4%

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Max leads

o3-pro: 23.8 (#171), Qwen3.7 Max: 49.2 (#38)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmarko3-proQwen3.7 Max
DTBench86.9%92.3%
LMCA38.5%44%
Epoch Capabilities Index147.42153.68
ARC-AGI-24.9%—
SimpleBench—70.4%
Kagi LLM Benchmark72.1%—
NYT Connections (extended)—85.1%
ARC-AGI-159.3%—
CritPt—13.4%
Chess Puzzles—19%
EBR-Bench—9.5%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1483
Mystery Game Puzzles—32%

Math Not comparable

o3-pro: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 62.4 (#32)

Math benchmarks
Benchmarko3-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

o3-pro: 29.5 (#238), Qwen3.7 Max: 61.6 (#28)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmarko3-proQwen3.7 Max
GPQA Diamond—90.9%
SimpleQA Verified—55.8%
Confabulations14.2%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate23.3%—
LMArena Expert—1488

Multilingual Not comparable

o3-pro: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 56.9 (#15)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmarko3-proQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Non-English—1474
LMArena Chinese—1530
LMArena Russian—1484

Instruction Following Not comparable

o3-pro: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 76.7 (#38)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmarko3-proQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Instruction Following—1460

Long Context o3-pro leads

o3-pro: 72.2 (#1), Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#40)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmarko3-proQwen3.7 Max
Fiction.LiveBench97.2%—
LMArena Longer Query—1482

Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Max leads

o3-pro: 57.1 (#133), Qwen3.7 Max: 65.0 (#54)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmarko3-proQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Text—1476
LMArena Creative Writing—1449
Short-Story Creative Writing84.4%—
EQ-Bench 4—1110
LMArena Multi-Turn—1481

Frequently asked questions

Is o3-pro better than Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 42.9 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, o3-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; o3-pro lists at $20 and $80.

Is o3-pro or Qwen3.7 Max better for coding?

o3-pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 50.4 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

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

How many benchmarks do o3-pro and Qwen3.7 Max share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. o3-pro has 12 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Max has 33.

Related comparisons

Go deeper