# Qwen3.7 Plus vs Ring-2.6-1T

> Qwen3.7 Plus has enough public results to be ranked (#66); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/qwen3-7-plus-vs-ring-2-6-1t
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 2

## Summary

- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen3.7 Plus scores higher in 1 category and Ring-2.6-1T in 1 category; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.7 Plus leads 38.4 to 25.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is CritPt: 9.1% for Qwen3.7 Plus and 3.7% for Ring-2.6-1T.
- Ring-2.6-1T has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Qwen3.7 Plus | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Ant Group (inclusionAI) |
| Noometry Index | 45.0 | 36.3 |
| Rank | 66 | — |
| Context | 1M | — |
| Input $/M | $0.40 | — |
| Output $/M | $1.60 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Qwen3.7 Plus: 36.1 (#200)
- Ring-2.6-1T: 40.1

| Benchmark | Qwen3.7 Plus | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 45.5% | 42.4% |
| FrontierCode | 10.2% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1473 | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 432.57 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Qwen3.7 Plus: 21.2 (#130)
- Ring-2.6-1T: —

| Benchmark | Qwen3.7 Plus | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| OSWorld 2.0 | 2.8% | — |

## Reasoning

- Qwen3.7 Plus: 38.4 (#54)
- Ring-2.6-1T: 25.3

| Benchmark | Qwen3.7 Plus | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 9.1% | 3.7% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 74.8% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 24% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1460 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 17% | — |
| DTBench | 84% | — |
| LMCA | 37.6% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 147.39 | — |

## Math

- Qwen3.7 Plus: 49.3 (#47)
- Ring-2.6-1T: —

| Benchmark | Qwen3.7 Plus | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 34.4% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 93.3% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1467 | — |

## Knowledge

- Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.9 (#46)
- Ring-2.6-1T: —

| Benchmark | Qwen3.7 Plus | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 87.9% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1467 | — |

## Multimodal

- Qwen3.7 Plus: 41.2 (#30)
- Ring-2.6-1T: —

| Benchmark | Qwen3.7 Plus | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1281 | — |
| LMArena Document | 1444 | — |

## Multilingual

- Qwen3.7 Plus: 55.0 (#36)
- Ring-2.6-1T: —

| Benchmark | Qwen3.7 Plus | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| 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

- Qwen3.7 Plus: 75.9 (#49)
- Ring-2.6-1T: —

| Benchmark | Qwen3.7 Plus | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1439 | — |

## Long Context

- Qwen3.7 Plus: 44.5 (#61)
- Ring-2.6-1T: —

| Benchmark | Qwen3.7 Plus | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1454 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Qwen3.7 Plus: 64.5 (#54)
- Ring-2.6-1T: —

| Benchmark | Qwen3.7 Plus | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1454 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1439 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1459 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Qwen3.7 Plus better than Ring-2.6-1T?

Qwen3.7 Plus has enough public results to be ranked (#66); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

### Is Qwen3.7 Plus or Ring-2.6-1T better for coding?

Ring-2.6-1T scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 36.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Qwen3.7 Plus and Ring-2.6-1T share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3.7 Plus has 32 scored results on Noometry and Ring-2.6-1T has 3.