Model comparison

Qwen Turbo vs Qwen3.7 Max

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 43× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.

Qwen Turbo Alibaba (Qwen)

27.1

Rank #335 Reported

Qwen3.7 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

51.5

Rank #42 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen Turbo scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.7 Max in 2 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.7 Max leads 62.4 to 15.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 6.1% for Qwen Turbo and 95.6% for Qwen3.7 Max.
  • Qwen Turbo is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $7.50 for Qwen3.7 Max.

Side by side

Qwen Turbo and Qwen3.7 Max specifications
Qwen TurboQwen3.7 Max
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index27.151.5
Released2024-11-012026-05-19
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1M
Max output16K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.05$2.50
Output $ / M tokens$0.20$7.50
Results tracked333

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Qwen Turbo: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 50.4 (#45)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen TurboQwen3.7 Max
SWE-bench Verified—77.3%
LMArena WebDev—1515
SciCode—48.8%
LMArena Coding—1498
ALE-Bench—1,189

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen Turbo: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 22.1 (#135)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen TurboQwen3.7 Max
GBAEval—0.4%

Reasoning Not comparable

Qwen Turbo: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 49.2 (#38)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen TurboQwen3.7 Max
SimpleBench—70.4%
NYT Connections (extended)—85.1%
CritPt—13.4%
Chess Puzzles—19%
EBR-Bench—9.5%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1483
Mystery Game Puzzles—32%
DTBench—92.3%
LMCA—44%
Epoch Capabilities Index—153.68

Math Qwen3.7 Max leads

Qwen Turbo: 15.3 (#297), Qwen3.7 Max: 62.4 (#32)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen TurboQwen3.7 Max
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20256.1%95.6%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—64.6%
FrontierMath Tier 4—34.1%
ProofBench—26%
LMArena Math—1490
MATH Level 556.2%—

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Max leads

Qwen Turbo: 22.2 (#272), Qwen3.7 Max: 61.6 (#28)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen TurboQwen3.7 Max
GPQA Diamond41.8%90.9%
SimpleQA Verified—55.8%
LMArena Expert—1488

Multilingual Not comparable

Qwen Turbo: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 56.9 (#15)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen TurboQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Non-English—1474
LMArena Chinese—1530
LMArena Russian—1484

Instruction Following Not comparable

Qwen Turbo: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 76.7 (#38)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen TurboQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Instruction Following—1460

Long Context Not comparable

Qwen Turbo: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#40)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen TurboQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Longer Query—1482

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Qwen Turbo: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 65.0 (#54)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen TurboQwen3.7 Max
LMArena Text—1476
LMArena Creative Writing—1449
EQ-Bench 4—1110
LMArena Multi-Turn—1481

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen Turbo better than Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 43× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Qwen Turbo or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen Turbo is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Max lists at $2.50 and $7.50.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 1M tokens.

How many benchmarks do Qwen Turbo and Qwen3.7 Max share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen Turbo has 3 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Max has 33.

Related comparisons

Go deeper