Model comparison
Qwen1.5-72B vs Step 3.7 Flash
Step 3.7 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 30.8 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 33.2.
Side by side
| Qwen1.5-72B | Step 3.7 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | StepFun |
| Noometry Index | 30.8 | 37.3 |
| Released | 2024-02-04 | 2026-05-29 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 256K |
| Max output | — | 256K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.18 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.11 |
| Results tracked | 22 | 5 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Step 3.7 Flash leads
Qwen1.5-72B: 31.9 (#277), Step 3.7 Flash: 40.0 (#150)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-72B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 40% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 33.2% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1165 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 40.3% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 694.12 |
| HumanEval+ | 59.1% | — |
| MBPP+ | 61.6% | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
Qwen1.5-72B: 22.2 (#203), Step 3.7 Flash: 21.6 (#219)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-72B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 39.7% |
| CritPt | — | 2.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1148 | — |
Math Step 3.7 Flash leads
Qwen1.5-72B: 33.2 (#205), Step 3.7 Flash: 42.9 (#82)
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-72B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 68.5% |
| LMArena Math | 1164 | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Qwen1.5-72B: 11.5 (#300), Step 3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-72B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 28.8% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1136 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Qwen1.5-72B: 33.2 (#253), Step 3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-72B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1135 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1186 | — |
| LMArena French | 1159 | — |
| LMArena German | 1084 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1061 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1050 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1104 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1110 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Qwen1.5-72B: 59.3 (#256), Step 3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-72B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1141 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Qwen1.5-72B: 35.1 (#243), Step 3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-72B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1157 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Qwen1.5-72B: 37.3 (#258), Step 3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | Qwen1.5-72B | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1166 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1137 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1160 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen1.5-72B better than Step 3.7 Flash?
Step 3.7 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Qwen1.5-72B or Step 3.7 Flash better for coding?
Step 3.7 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.0 versus 31.9 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Qwen1.5-72B and Step 3.7 Flash share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen1.5-72B has 22 scored results on Noometry and Step 3.7 Flash has 5.