Model comparison

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 Alibaba (Qwen)

38.8

Rank #181 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

45.3

Rank #72 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 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 35.5.

Side by side

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 and Qwen3.7 Plus specifications
Qwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.7 Plus
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index38.845.3
Released—2026-06-02
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.40
Output $ / M tokens—$1.60
Results tracked1432

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 38.5 (#175), Qwen3.7 Plus: 36.6 (#206)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Coding13141473
FrontierCode—10.2%
SciCode—45.5%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 21.4 (#138)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.7 Plus
OSWorld 2.0—2.8%

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 25.9 (#141), Qwen3.7 Plus: 39.3 (#59)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Hard Prompts12991460
NYT Connections (extended)—74.8%
CritPt—9.1%
Chess Puzzles—24%
Mystery Game Puzzles—17%
DTBench—84%
LMCA—37.6%
Epoch Capabilities Index—147.37

Math Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 36.1 (#174), Qwen3.7 Plus: 50.5 (#56)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Math12981466
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—34.4%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—93.3%

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 35.5 (#183), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.9 (#51)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Expert12891467
GPQA Diamond—87.9%

Multimodal Not comparable

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 41.8 (#33)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Vision—1279
LMArena Document—1444

Multilingual Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 41.9 (#201), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.8 (#38)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Non-English12651445
LMArena Chinese13141510
LMArena German12311471
LMArena Japanese12071413
LMArena Russian12711457
LMArena French—1473
LMArena Korean—1415
LMArena Spanish—1457

Instruction Following Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.2 (#199), Qwen3.7 Plus: 75.8 (#52)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Instruction Following12751440

Long Context Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#184), Qwen3.7 Plus: 44.5 (#65)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Longer Query12921455

Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.4 (#192), Qwen3.7 Plus: 64.3 (#56)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen2.5 Plus 1127Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text12991455
LMArena Creative Writing12621439
LMArena Multi-Turn12991460

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better than Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 or Qwen3.7 Plus better for coding?

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.5 versus 36.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 and Qwen3.7 Plus share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Plus has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper