Compare / Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 vs Qwen3.7-Max
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 vs Qwen3.7-Max
Which is cheaper, which is more capable, and which does better at each kind of work, from 13 results on 2 sources that measured both models.
Of the 13 results both models have, the better value on each. Results whose reported ranges overlap are too close to call.
Results as of 13 October 2026 (catalogue release 2026-10-13-2e2420e3c5cc).
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or Qwen3.7-Max? The short answer
Pick Qwen3.7-Max if quality matters most: it scores higher (Intelligence Index 29.5 against 12.7). Pick Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 if cost matters more: it costs 2.3 times less per token.
- Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 is cheaper: $0.97 against $2.21 per million tokens, 2.3 times less.
- Qwen3.7-Max scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index: 29.5 against 12.7.
- Qwen3.7-Max is newer: released 19 May 2026, against 25 Jul 2025 for Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507.
- On third-party benchmarks, on the results both models have: Qwen3.7-Max does better for agents and tool use, reasoning and knowledge and sticking to the facts.
Head to head
Every fact side by side
| Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 | Qwen3.7-Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Price per million tokens | $0.30 in · $3.00 out | $1.48 in · $4.42 out |
| Blended (3 in : 1 out) | $0.97 | $2.21 |
| Cheapest host, blended | $0.75 (Alibaba) | – |
| Intelligence Index | 12.7 | 29.5 |
| Spring Prompt overall | – | – |
| Output speed, tokens a second | – | – |
| Context window | 131,072 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens |
| Released | 25 Jul 2025 | 19 May 2026 (newer) |
| Weights | Open | Closed |
| Developer based in | China | China |
Prices are the developer's list price where we have read it, otherwise the typical host on OpenRouter; see every model's price. Intelligence and speed from Artificial Analysis.
Which is better for what
Each model's rank among the models on sale today, for each kind of work, from our own benchmarks and licensed sources. Further right is better; the better rank is in green.
Every shared result
Each model's best result on every measure both have, grouped by benchmark, with the setting that produced it. Under each measure, every model that benchmark has measured is a grey tick, best to the right, so you can see where the two sit in the field. The headline measures of each benchmark come first; the rest are under "Show all". Green marks the better value; where a source reports ranges that overlap, neither is marked.
| Measure | Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 | Qwen3.7-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 3 results | ||
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence Indexindex score, higher is better 147 · 53 of 243 measured | 12.7 | 29.5 |
| GPQA Diamond% of questions, higher is better 114 · 21 of 231 measured | 79.0% | 92.3% |
| Humanity's Last Exam% of questions, higher is better 122 · 39 of 242 measured | 15.9% | 40.5% |
| SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI) reported by SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI) · 1 result | ||
| Correct answers% of questions, higher is better 44 · 18 of 76 measured | 40.4% | 55.8% |
Show all 13 results (9 more)
| Measure | Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 | Qwen3.7-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 9 results | ||
| Terminal-Bench 2.1% of tasks, higher is better 101 · 33 of 130 measured | 12.0% | 74.5% |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0% of tasks, higher is better 66 · 51 of 112 measured | 0.0% | 1.5% |
| τ-bench banking% of tasks, higher is better 87 · 71 of 121 measured | 7.8% | 11.8% |
| Artificial Analysis Coding Indexindex score, higher is better 98 · 34 of 131 measured | 22.1 | 66.0 |
| IFBench% of instructions, higher is better 101 · 5 of 195 measured | 51.2% | 80.5% |
| Long-context reasoning (AA-LCR)% of questions, higher is better 99 · 50 of 233 measured | 72.0% | 79.0% |
| SciCode% of problems, higher is better 74 · 52 of 113 measured | 41.4% | 49.5% |
| Terminal-Bench Hard% of tasks, higher is better 116 · 12 of 190 measured | 13.6% | 50.8% |
| τ²-bench telecom% of tasks, higher is better 101 · 22 of 193 measured | 53.2% | 94.7% |
Quick answers
Is Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 better than Qwen3.7-Max?
Pick Qwen3.7-Max if quality matters most: it scores higher (Intelligence Index 29.5 against 12.7). Pick Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 if cost matters more: it costs 2.3 times less per token.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or Qwen3.7-Max?
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 is cheaper: $0.97 against $2.21 per million tokens, 2.3 times less.
Which is better for agents and tool use, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or Qwen3.7-Max?
Qwen3.7-Max ranks 69 of 164 models on sale for multi-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls, against 138 for Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507.
Which is better for reasoning and knowledge, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or Qwen3.7-Max?
Qwen3.7-Max ranks 39 of 198 models on sale for hard questions across science, maths and general knowledge, against 117 for Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507.
Which is better for sticking to the facts, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or Qwen3.7-Max?
Qwen3.7-Max ranks 31 of 152 models on sale for summarising without inventing things, and factual answers, against 92 for Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507.
Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 or Qwen3.7-Max?
Qwen3.7-Max: 1,000,000 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507.
Run Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 and Qwen3.7-Max on your own prompt
Benchmarks aren't your data. Try both side by side in the playground, with the cost of every answer.