Noometry

Model comparison

Qwen3.6 Flash vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 38.4 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.6 Flash costs 1.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 8 shared benchmarks.

Qwen3.6 Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

38.4

Rank #176 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

45.0

Rank #66 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen3.6 Flash scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.7 Plus in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.7 Plus leads 54.9 to 42.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 22.5% for Qwen3.6 Flash and 34.4% for Qwen3.7 Plus.
  • Qwen3.6 Flash is cheaper at $0.19 / $1.13 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $1.60 for Qwen3.7 Plus.

Side by side

Qwen3.6 FlashQwen3.7 Plus
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index38.445.0
Released2026-04-272026-06-02
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1M
Max output66K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.19$0.40
Output $ / M tokens$1.13$1.60
Results tracked1332

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Qwen3.6 Flash: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 36.1 (#200)

BenchmarkQwen3.6 FlashQwen3.7 Plus
FrontierCode—10.2%
SciCode—45.5%
LMArena Coding—1473
ALE-Bench326.4—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen3.6 Flash: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 21.2 (#130)

BenchmarkQwen3.6 FlashQwen3.7 Plus
OSWorld 2.0—2.8%

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Qwen3.6 Flash: 28.4 (#90), Qwen3.7 Plus: 38.4 (#54)

BenchmarkQwen3.6 FlashQwen3.7 Plus
Chess Puzzles20%24%
Mystery Game Puzzles18%17%
DTBench77.1%84%
LMCA31%37.6%
Epoch Capabilities Index143.26147.39
SimpleBench35.2%—
NYT Connections (extended)—74.8%
CritPt—9.1%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1460

Math Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Qwen3.6 Flash: 38.0 (#88), Qwen3.7 Plus: 49.3 (#47)

BenchmarkQwen3.6 FlashQwen3.7 Plus
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)22.5%34.4%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202584.4%93.3%
LMArena Math—1467
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)10.3%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)0%—

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Qwen3.6 Flash: 42.2 (#90), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.9 (#46)

BenchmarkQwen3.6 FlashQwen3.7 Plus
GPQA Diamond83.3%87.9%
SimpleQA Verified15.9%—
LMArena Expert—1467

Multimodal Not comparable

Qwen3.6 Flash: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 41.2 (#30)

BenchmarkQwen3.6 FlashQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Vision—1281
LMArena Document—1444

Multilingual Not comparable

Qwen3.6 Flash: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 55.0 (#36)

BenchmarkQwen3.6 FlashQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Non-English—1445
LMArena Chinese—1510
LMArena French—1471
LMArena German—1471
LMArena Japanese—1411
LMArena Korean—1416
LMArena Russian—1457
LMArena Spanish—1453

Instruction Following Not comparable

Qwen3.6 Flash: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 75.9 (#49)

BenchmarkQwen3.6 FlashQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Instruction Following—1439

Long Context Not comparable

Qwen3.6 Flash: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 44.5 (#61)

BenchmarkQwen3.6 FlashQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Longer Query—1454

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Qwen3.6 Flash: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 64.5 (#54)

BenchmarkQwen3.6 FlashQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text—1454
LMArena Creative Writing—1439
LMArena Multi-Turn—1459

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen3.6 Flash better than Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 38.4 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.6 Flash costs 1.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.6 Flash or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.19 per million input tokens and $1.13 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Plus lists at $0.40 and $1.60.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 1M tokens.

How many benchmarks do Qwen3.6 Flash and Qwen3.7 Plus share?

8 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3.6 Flash has 13 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Plus has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper