Noometry

Model comparison

Qwen3.7 Max vs Solar Pro4

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 42.1 on the Noometry Index. Solar Pro4 costs 7.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

Qwen3.7 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

51.5

Rank #42 Confirmed

Solar Pro4 Upstage

42.1

Rank #121 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen3.7 Max scores higher in 8 categories and Solar Pro4 in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.7 Max leads 62.4 to 38.8.
  • Solar Pro4 is cheaper at $0.30 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $7.50 for Qwen3.7 Max.
  • Qwen3.7 Max accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 524K.

Side by side

Qwen3.7 MaxSolar Pro4
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Upstage
Noometry Index51.542.1
Released2026-05-192026-08-06
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M524K
Max output131K131K
Input $ / M tokens$2.50$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$7.50$1.20
Results tracked3318

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3.7 Max leads

Qwen3.7 Max: 50.4 (#45), Solar Pro4: 40.1 (#149)

BenchmarkQwen3.7 MaxSolar Pro4
LMArena WebDev15151371
LMArena Coding14981437
SWE-bench Verified77.3%—
SciCode48.8%—
ALE-Bench1,189—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen3.7 Max: 22.1 (#135), Solar Pro4: —

BenchmarkQwen3.7 MaxSolar Pro4
GBAEval0.4%—

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Max leads

Qwen3.7 Max: 49.2 (#38), Solar Pro4: 28.5 (#104)

BenchmarkQwen3.7 MaxSolar Pro4
LMArena Hard Prompts14831399
SimpleBench70.4%—
NYT Connections (extended)85.1%—
CritPt13.4%—
Chess Puzzles19%—
EBR-Bench9.5%—
Mystery Game Puzzles32%—
DTBench92.3%—
LMCA44%—
Epoch Capabilities Index153.68—

Math Qwen3.7 Max leads

Qwen3.7 Max: 62.4 (#32), Solar Pro4: 38.8 (#128)

BenchmarkQwen3.7 MaxSolar Pro4
LMArena Math14901416
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)64.6%—
FrontierMath Tier 434.1%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202595.6%—
ProofBench26%—

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Max leads

Qwen3.7 Max: 61.6 (#28), Solar Pro4: 39.8 (#129)

BenchmarkQwen3.7 MaxSolar Pro4
LMArena Expert14881427
GPQA Diamond90.9%—
SimpleQA Verified55.8%—

Multilingual Qwen3.7 Max leads

Qwen3.7 Max: 56.9 (#15), Solar Pro4: 48.7 (#139)

BenchmarkQwen3.7 MaxSolar Pro4
LMArena Non-English14741361
LMArena Chinese15301415
LMArena Russian14841360
LMArena French—1397
LMArena German—1364
LMArena Japanese—1309
LMArena Korean—1382
LMArena Spanish—1401

Instruction Following Qwen3.7 Max leads

Qwen3.7 Max: 76.7 (#38), Solar Pro4: 72.7 (#132)

BenchmarkQwen3.7 MaxSolar Pro4
LMArena Instruction Following14601377

Long Context Qwen3.7 Max leads

Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#40), Solar Pro4: 42.1 (#130)

BenchmarkQwen3.7 MaxSolar Pro4
LMArena Longer Query14821381

Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Max leads

Qwen3.7 Max: 65.0 (#54), Solar Pro4: 56.5 (#138)

BenchmarkQwen3.7 MaxSolar Pro4
LMArena Text14761386
LMArena Creative Writing14491316
LMArena Multi-Turn14811385
EQ-Bench 41110—

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen3.7 Max better than Solar Pro4?

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 42.1 on the Noometry Index. Solar Pro4 costs 7.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.7 Max or Solar Pro4?

Solar Pro4 is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Max lists at $2.50 and $7.50.

Is Qwen3.7 Max or Solar Pro4 better for coding?

Qwen3.7 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.4 versus 40.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.7 Max does, with 1M tokens against 524K.

How many benchmarks do Qwen3.7 Max and Solar Pro4 share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3.7 Max has 33 scored results on Noometry and Solar Pro4 has 18.

Related comparisons

Go deeper