Model comparison

Qwen2.5-Max vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 40.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

Qwen2.5-Max Alibaba (Qwen)

40.7

Rank #146 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

45.3

Rank #72 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen2.5-Max scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.7 Plus in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.7 Plus leads 54.9 to 35.3.

Side by side

Qwen2.5-Max and Qwen3.7 Plus specifications
Qwen2.5-MaxQwen3.7 Plus
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index40.745.3
Released2025-01-252026-06-02
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.40
Output $ / M tokens—$1.60
Results tracked2732

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen2.5-Max leads

Qwen2.5-Max: 41.8 (#117), Qwen3.7 Plus: 36.6 (#206)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Coding13591473
FrontierCode—10.2%
SciCode—45.5%
LiveBench Coding64.4%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen2.5-Max: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 21.4 (#138)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.7 Plus
OSWorld 2.0—2.8%

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Qwen2.5-Max: 25.6 (#147), Qwen3.7 Plus: 39.3 (#59)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Hard Prompts13601460
Epoch Capabilities Index132.53147.37
NYT Connections (extended)—74.8%
CritPt—9.1%
Chess Puzzles—24%
LiveBench Reasoning51.4%—
Mystery Game Puzzles—17%
DTBench—84%
LiveBench Data Analysis67.9%—
LMCA—37.6%
LiveBench62.3%—

Math Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Qwen2.5-Max: 36.9 (#162), Qwen3.7 Plus: 50.5 (#56)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Math13691466
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—34.4%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—93.3%
LiveBench Math58.4%—

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Qwen2.5-Max: 35.3 (#186), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.9 (#51)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Expert13371467
GPQA Diamond—87.9%
Confabulations21.8%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Qwen2.5-Max: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 41.8 (#33)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Vision—1279
LMArena Document—1444

Multilingual Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Qwen2.5-Max: 48.1 (#146), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.8 (#38)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Non-English13521445
LMArena Chinese13821510
LMArena French13961473
LMArena German13501471
LMArena Japanese13001413
LMArena Korean13041415
LMArena Russian13531457
LMArena Spanish13771457

Instruction Following Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Qwen2.5-Max: 71.3 (#152), Qwen3.7 Plus: 75.8 (#52)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Instruction Following13351440
LiveBench Instruction Following75.3%—

Long Context Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Qwen2.5-Max: 41.4 (#142), Qwen3.7 Plus: 44.5 (#65)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Longer Query13581455

Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Qwen2.5-Max: 55.4 (#146), Qwen3.7 Plus: 64.3 (#56)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5-MaxQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text13671455
LMArena Creative Writing13391439
LMArena Multi-Turn13641460
Short-Story Creative Writing72.9%—
LiveBench Language56.3%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen2.5-Max better than Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 40.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is Qwen2.5-Max or Qwen3.7 Plus better for coding?

Qwen2.5-Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 36.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Qwen2.5-Max and Qwen3.7 Plus share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen2.5-Max has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Plus has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper