vs
0:0
overall capability wins (2 ties across 2 scored). Qwen3.7 Plus leads overall.
- Pricing3:0
- Speed2:0
Verdict
Qwen3.7 Flash is ~12.7x cheaper on a blended token basis than Qwen3.7 Plus.
Cost for 1M in + 250K out
Illustrative chat workload at primary-provider list prices.
- Qwen3.7 Flash
- $0.06
- Qwen3.7 Plus
- $0.80
Qwen3.7 Flash is about 12.8x cheaper on this workload.
Price per 1M tokens
Full comparison
Organization
Alibaba
Alibaba
Family
Qwen
Qwen
License
Proprietary
Proprietary
Open weights
No
No
Release
Jul 27, 2026
Jun 3, 2026
Knowledge cutoff
-
-
API / provider
Alibaba Cloud
Alibaba Cloud
Modalities
text, image, video → text
text, image, video → text
Specs
Context window
1M
1M
Max output
66K
66K
Parameters
—
—
Pricing
Input $/1M
$0.03
$0.40
Output $/1M
$0.13
$1.60
Blended $/1M (3∶1)
$0.06
$0.70
Speed
tok/s
140
95
TTFT (s)
0.25
0.35
Reasoning
MMLU-Pro
—
—
GPQA Diamond
—
90.0
Humanity's Last Exam
—
35.6
AIME 2025
—
—
MATH-500
—
—
Humanity's Last Exam (with tools)
—
—
AA-Omniscience Accuracy
—
22.5
AA-LCR v1.1
—
73.0
CritPt
—
9.1
MMMU-Pro
—
80.5
IFBench
—
78.0
Chartography
—
—
Chartography (With Tools)
—
—
Coding
SWE-bench Verified
—
—
SWE-bench Pro
—
—
SWE-bench Multilingual
—
—
LiveCodeBench
—
—
Terminal-Bench 2.1
—
61.0
Aider Polyglot
—
—
Terminal-Bench 3
—
—
BigCodeBench
—
—
SciCode
—
46.1
CursorBench
—
—
SWE-Rebench
—
—
NL2Repo-Bench
—
—
DeepSWE
—
—
WebDev Arena
—
—
Terminal-Bench 4.0
—
—
CursorBench 4.0
—
—
FrontierCode v1.1 (Main)
—
—
Arena
LMArena Elo
—
1,456
| Metric | Qwen3.7 Flash | Qwen3.7 Plus | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Identity | |||
| Organization | Alibaba | Alibaba | — |
| Family | Qwen | Qwen | — |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary | — |
| Open weights | No | No | — |
| Release | Jul 27, 2026 | Jun 3, 2026 | — |
| Knowledge cutoff | - | - | — |
| API / provider | Alibaba Cloud | Alibaba Cloud | — |
| Modalities | text, image, video → text | text, image, video → text | — |
| Specs | |||
| Context window | 1M | 1M | tie |
| Max output | 66K | 66K | tie |
| Parameters | — | — | — |
| Pricing | |||
| Input $/1M | $0.03 | $0.40 | A +$0.37 |
| Output $/1M | $0.13 | $1.60 | A +$1.47 |
| Blended $/1M (3∶1) | $0.06 | $0.70 | A +$0.65 |
| Speed | |||
| tok/s | 140 | 95 | A +45 |
| TTFT (s) | 0.25 | 0.35 | A +0.10 |
| Reasoning | |||
| MMLU-Pro | — | — | — |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 90.0 | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 35.6 | — |
| AIME 2025 | — | — | — |
| MATH-500 | — | — | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam (with tools) | — | — | — |
| AA-Omniscience Accuracy | — | 22.5 | — |
| AA-LCR v1.1 | — | 73.0 | — |
| CritPt | — | 9.1 | — |
| MMMU-Pro | — | 80.5 | — |
| IFBench | — | 78.0 | — |
| Chartography | — | — | — |
| Chartography (With Tools) | — | — | — |
| Coding | |||
| SWE-bench Verified | — | — | — |
| SWE-bench Pro | — | — | — |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | — | — | — |
| LiveCodeBench | — | — | — |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 | — | 61.0 | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | — | — |
| Terminal-Bench 3 | — | — | — |
| BigCodeBench | — | — | — |
| SciCode | — | 46.1 | — |
| CursorBench | — | — | — |
| SWE-Rebench | — | — | — |
| NL2Repo-Bench | — | — | — |
| DeepSWE | — | — | — |
| WebDev Arena | — | — | — |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 | — | — | — |
| CursorBench 4.0 | — | — | — |
| FrontierCode v1.1 (Main) | — | — | — |
| Arena | |||
| LMArena Elo | — | 1,456 | — |
Qwen3.7 Flash
- Context
- 1M / 66K out
- Parameters
- —
- Price
- $0.03 / $0.13
- Speed
- 140 tok/s · 0.25s TTFT
- Modalities
- text, image, video → text
- License
- Proprietary
Cheapest Qwen3.7 vision-language tier (Jul 2026) for high-volume multimodal agents; under-32K prompts at $0.03/$0.13 — no public quality scorecard yet.
Qwen3.7 Plus
- Context
- 1M / 66K out
- Parameters
- —
- Price
- $0.40 / $1.60
- Speed
- 95 tok/s · 0.35s TTFT
- Modalities
- text, image, video → text
- License
- Proprietary
Mid-tier Qwen3.7 multimodal agent (Jun 2026) — GUI grounding, tool use, and 1M context at roughly 5× lower cost than Max; no numeric scorecard retained without exact published values.
Benchmark charts
Winner bars are emphasized. Per-benchmark deltas sit above each chart.
These two models have no overlapping published benchmarks in our dataset. Compare specs and pricing instead.