# Qwen Max vs Step 3.7 Flash

> Step 3.7 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 34.7 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/qwen-max-vs-step-3-7-flash
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in math, where Step 3.7 Flash leads 42.9 to 22.3.
- Step 3.7 Flash is cheaper at $0.18 / $1.11 per million input/output tokens, against $1.60 / $6.40 for Qwen Max.
- Step 3.7 Flash accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 33K.
- Step 3.7 Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Qwen Max | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | StepFun |
| Noometry Index | 34.7 | 37.3 |
| Rank | 230 | 207 |
| Context | 33K | 256K |
| Input $/M | $1.60 | $0.18 |
| Output $/M | $6.40 | $1.11 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Qwen Max: 30.7 (#292)
- Step 3.7 Flash: 40.0 (#150)

| Benchmark | Qwen Max | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 21.8% | — |
| SciCode | — | 40% |
| LMArena Coding | 1288 | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 694.12 |

## Reasoning

- Qwen Max: 25.1 (#151)
- Step 3.7 Flash: 21.6 (#219)

| Benchmark | Qwen Max | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 39.7% |
| CritPt | — | 2.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1269 | — |

## Math

- Qwen Max: 22.3 (#276)
- Step 3.7 Flash: 42.9 (#82)

| Benchmark | Qwen Max | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 68.5% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 16.1% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1275 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 67.2% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1% | — |

## Knowledge

- Qwen Max: 30.3 (#228)
- Step 3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Qwen Max | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 56.1% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1248 | — |

## Multilingual

- Qwen Max: 41.8 (#202)
- Step 3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Qwen Max | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1263 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1254 | — |
| LMArena French | 1330 | — |
| LMArena German | 1254 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1205 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1142 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1274 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1290 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Qwen Max: 66.5 (#208)
- Step 3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Qwen Max | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1262 | — |

## Long Context

- Qwen Max: 39.4 (#180)
- Step 3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Qwen Max | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 66.7% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1288 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Qwen Max: 47.8 (#205)
- Step 3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | Qwen Max | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1282 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1248 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1277 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Qwen Max better than Step 3.7 Flash?

Step 3.7 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 34.7 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, Qwen Max 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; Qwen Max lists at $1.60 and $6.40.

### Is Qwen Max or Step 3.7 Flash better for coding?

Step 3.7 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.0 versus 30.7 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Step 3.7 Flash does, with 256K tokens against 33K.

### How many benchmarks do Qwen Max and Step 3.7 Flash share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen Max has 23 scored results on Noometry and Step 3.7 Flash has 5.