Model comparison

Qwen3 235B-A22B vs Step 3.7 Flash

Qwen3 235B-A22B is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index. Step 3.7 Flash costs 2.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3 235B-A22B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.

Qwen3 235B-A22B Alibaba (Qwen)

43.5

Rank #91 Confirmed

Step 3.7 Flash StepFun

37.3

Rank #207 Reported

Summary

  • They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen3 235B-A22B scores higher in 2 categories and Step 3.7 Flash in 1 category; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3 235B-A22B leads 50.4 to 42.9.
  • Step 3.7 Flash is cheaper at $0.18 / $1.11 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen3 235B-A22B.
  • Step 3.7 Flash accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 131K.

Side by side

Qwen3 235B-A22B and Step 3.7 Flash specifications
Qwen3 235B-A22BStep 3.7 Flash
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)StepFun
Noometry Index43.537.3
Released2025-042026-05-29
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window131K256K
Max output16K256K
Input $ / M tokens$0.70$0.18
Output $ / M tokens$2.80$1.11
Results tracked495

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

Qwen3 235B-A22B: 44.3 (#75), Step 3.7 Flash: 40.0 (#150)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 235B-A22BStep 3.7 Flash
SciCode42.4%40%
Aider Polyglot59.6%—
WeirdML41%—
LMArena Coding1445—
ALE-Bench—694.12

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen3 235B-A22B: 33.9 (#51), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 235B-A22BStep 3.7 Flash
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard52.1%—
Vending-Bench 2-11.34—

Reasoning Step 3.7 Flash leads

Qwen3 235B-A22B: 15.7 (#311), Step 3.7 Flash: 21.6 (#219)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 235B-A22BStep 3.7 Flash
CritPt0%2.3%
ARC-AGI-21.3%—
SimpleBench31%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark69.4%—
NYT Connections (extended)—39.7%
ARC-AGI-111%—
Chess Puzzles12%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1433—
Mystery Game Puzzles9%—
DTBench80.3%—
LMCA29.3%—
Epoch Capabilities Index143.85—
ForecastBench59.7—

Math Qwen3 235B-A22B leads

Qwen3 235B-A22B: 50.4 (#57), Step 3.7 Flash: 42.9 (#82)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 235B-A22BStep 3.7 Flash
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—68.5%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202586.7%—
Omni-MATH71.8%—
LMArena Math1432—
MATH Level 568.9%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)8.5%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)0%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Qwen3 235B-A22B: 49.6 (#73), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 235B-A22BStep 3.7 Flash
GPQA Diamond80.1%—
SimpleQA Verified40.4%—
MMLU-Pro84.4%—
Confabulations15.6%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate9.3%—
GPQA (HELM)72.7%—
LMArena Expert1463—

Multilingual Not comparable

Qwen3 235B-A22B: 52.3 (#89), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 235B-A22BStep 3.7 Flash
LMArena Non-English1409—
LMArena Chinese1481—
LMArena French1445—
LMArena German1433—
LMArena Japanese1399—
LMArena Korean1391—
LMArena Russian1411—
LMArena Spanish1430—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Qwen3 235B-A22B: 72.6 (#136), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 235B-A22BStep 3.7 Flash
IFEval83.5%—
LMArena Instruction Following1408—

Long Context Not comparable

Qwen3 235B-A22B: 46.1 (#26), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 235B-A22BStep 3.7 Flash
Fiction.LiveBench75%—
LMArena Longer Query1426—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Qwen3 235B-A22B: 59.6 (#108), Step 3.7 Flash: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3 235B-A22BStep 3.7 Flash
LMArena Text1419—
LMArena Creative Writing1384—
Short-Story Creative Writing83%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1366—
WildBench86.6%—
LMArena Multi-Turn1432—

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen3 235B-A22B better than Step 3.7 Flash?

Qwen3 235B-A22B is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index. Step 3.7 Flash costs 2.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3 235B-A22B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3 235B-A22B or Step 3.7 Flash?

Step 3.7 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.18 per million input tokens and $1.11 per million output tokens; Qwen3 235B-A22B lists at $0.70 and $2.80.

Is Qwen3 235B-A22B or Step 3.7 Flash better for coding?

Qwen3 235B-A22B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.3 versus 40.0 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Step 3.7 Flash does, with 256K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Qwen3 235B-A22B and Step 3.7 Flash share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3 235B-A22B has 49 scored results on Noometry and Step 3.7 Flash has 5.

Related comparisons

Go deeper