# Qwen3.6 Plus vs Qwen3.7 Max

> Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 47.5 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.6 Plus costs 3.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/qwen3-6-plus-vs-qwen3-7-max
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 27

## Summary

- They share 27 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen3.6 Plus scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.7 Max in 8 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.7 Max leads 49.2 to 29.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 38.2% for Qwen3.6 Plus and 64.6% for Qwen3.7 Max.
- Qwen3.6 Plus is cheaper at $0.50 / $3 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $7.50 for Qwen3.7 Max.

## Snapshot

| | Qwen3.6 Plus | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 47.5 | 51.5 |
| Rank | 62 | 42 |
| Context | 1M | 1M |
| Input $/M | $0.50 | $2.50 |
| Output $/M | $3 | $7.50 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Qwen3.6 Plus: 40.8 (#130)
- Qwen3.7 Max: 50.4 (#45)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 Plus | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 57.9% | 77.3% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1461 | 1515 |
| SciCode | 40.7% | 48.8% |
| LMArena Coding | 1467 | 1498 |
| ALE-Bench | 670.15 | 1,189 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Qwen3.6 Plus: —
- Qwen3.7 Max: 22.1 (#135)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 Plus | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| GBAEval | — | 0.4% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,115 | — |

## Reasoning

- Qwen3.6 Plus: 29.3 (#93)
- Qwen3.7 Max: 49.2 (#38)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 Plus | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 60.3% | 85.1% |
| CritPt | 2.9% | 13.4% |
| Chess Puzzles | 17% | 19% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1449 | 1483 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 12% | 32% |
| DTBench | 81.9% | 92.3% |
| LMCA | 33.1% | 44% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 147.65 | 153.68 |
| SimpleBench | — | 70.4% |
| Thematic Generalization | 59.5% | — |
| EBR-Bench | — | 9.5% |

## Math

- Qwen3.6 Plus: 51.8 (#54)
- Qwen3.7 Max: 62.4 (#32)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 Plus | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 38.2% | 64.6% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 93.3% | 95.6% |
| LMArena Math | 1450 | 1490 |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 34.1% |
| ProofBench | — | 26% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 26.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 8.3% | — |

## Knowledge

- Qwen3.6 Plus: 56.1 (#45)
- Qwen3.7 Max: 61.6 (#28)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 Plus | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 88.4% | 90.9% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 44.1% | 55.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1454 | 1488 |

## Multilingual

- Qwen3.6 Plus: 53.3 (#70)
- Qwen3.7 Max: 56.9 (#15)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 Plus | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1424 | 1474 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1477 | 1530 |
| LMArena Russian | 1434 | 1484 |
| LMArena French | 1455 | — |
| LMArena German | 1452 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1389 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1379 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1432 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Qwen3.6 Plus: 75.0 (#74)
- Qwen3.7 Max: 76.7 (#38)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 Plus | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1425 | 1460 |

## Long Context

- Qwen3.6 Plus: 45.2 (#49)
- Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#40)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 Plus | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1439 | 1482 |
| CL-bench | 20.3% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Qwen3.6 Plus: 62.2 (#82)
- Qwen3.7 Max: 65.0 (#54)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 Plus | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1437 | 1476 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1404 | 1449 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1438 | 1481 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1110 |

## FAQ

### Is Qwen3.6 Plus better than Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 47.5 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.6 Plus costs 3.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Qwen3.6 Plus or Qwen3.7 Max?

Qwen3.6 Plus is cheaper. It lists at $0.50 per million input tokens and $3 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Max lists at $2.50 and $7.50.

### Is Qwen3.6 Plus or Qwen3.7 Max better for coding?

Qwen3.7 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.4 versus 40.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 1M tokens.

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

27 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3.6 Plus has 37 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Max has 33.