Model comparison
Qwen1.5-110B vs Step 3.7 Flash
Step 3.7 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 34.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)
StepFunSummary
- The widest gap is in math, where Step 3.7 Flash leads 42.9 to 33.7.
Side by side
| Qwen1.5-110B | Step 3.7 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | StepFun |
| Noometry Index | 34.2 | 37.3 |
| Released | 2024-04-25 | 2026-05-29 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 256K |
| Max output | — | 256K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.18 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.11 |
| Results tracked | 20 | 5 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Step 3.7 Flash leads
Qwen1.5-110B: 33.0 (#264), Step 3.7 Flash: 40.0 (#150)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-110B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 40% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 35% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1184 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 44.4% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 694.12 |
Reasoning Qwen1.5-110B leads
Qwen1.5-110B: 22.7 (#189), Step 3.7 Flash: 21.6 (#219)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-110B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 39.7% |
| CritPt | — | 2.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1168 | — |
| ForecastBench | 57.7 | — |
Math Step 3.7 Flash leads
Qwen1.5-110B: 33.7 (#201), Step 3.7 Flash: 42.9 (#82)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-110B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 68.5% |
| LMArena Math | 1185 | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Qwen1.5-110B: 31.2 (#219), Step 3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-110B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1144 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Qwen1.5-110B: 33.6 (#250), Step 3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-110B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1142 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1206 | — |
| LMArena French | 1151 | — |
| LMArena German | 1123 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1074 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1044 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1118 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1142 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Qwen1.5-110B: 60.3 (#252), Step 3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-110B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1158 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Qwen1.5-110B: 35.1 (#242), Step 3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-110B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1157 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Qwen1.5-110B: 38.0 (#255), Step 3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-110B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1175 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1148 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1160 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen1.5-110B better than Step 3.7 Flash?
Step 3.7 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 34.2 on the Noometry Index.
Is Qwen1.5-110B or Step 3.7 Flash better for coding?
Step 3.7 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.0 versus 33.0 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Qwen1.5-110B and Step 3.7 Flash share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen1.5-110B has 20 scored results on Noometry and Step 3.7 Flash has 5.