Compare / Qwen3.7-Max vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
Qwen3.7-Max vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
Which is cheaper, which is more capable, and which does better at each kind of work, from 17 results on 3 sources that measured both models.
Of the 17 results both models have, the better value on each. Results whose reported ranges overlap are too close to call.
Results as of 9 October 2026 (catalogue release 2026-10-09-dd620e778ac5). See also Alibaba vs Google, every model from both labs.
Qwen3.7-Max or Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview? The short answer
They score about the same, so pick Qwen3.7-Max: it costs 2.0 times less per token.
- Qwen3.7-Max is cheaper: $2.21 against $4.50 per million tokens, 2.0 times less.
- They score about the same on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (29.5 and 29.7).
- Qwen3.7-Max is newer: released 19 May 2026, against 19 Feb 2026 for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview.
- On third-party benchmarks, on the results both models have: Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview does better for agents and tool use, reasoning and knowledge and sticking to the facts.
Head to head
Every fact side by side
| Qwen3.7-Max | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | |
|---|---|---|
| Price per million tokens | $1.48 in · $4.42 out | $2.00 in · $12.00 out |
| Blended (3 in : 1 out) | $2.21 | $4.50 |
| Cheapest host, blended | – | $4.50 (Google) |
| Cached input, per million | – | $0.20 cached input |
| Intelligence Index | 29.5 | 29.7 |
| Spring Prompt overall | – | 49 |
| Output speed, tokens a second | – | 120 |
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens |
| Released | 19 May 2026 (newer) | 19 Feb 2026 |
| Weights | Closed | Closed |
| Developer based in | China | the US |
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.
From our research
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 | Qwen3.7-Max | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 3 results | ||
| Confirmed task success · AgentIPS effect estimate, higher is better 39 · 42 of 48 measured | -0.09arena agent | -0.10arena agent |
| Praise over complaint · AgentIPS effect estimate, higher is better 39 · 29 of 48 measured | -0.09arena agent | -0.01arena agent |
| Steerability · AgentIPS effect estimate, higher is better 41 · 37 of 48 measured | -0.06arena agent | -0.05arena agent |
| Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 3 results | ||
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence Indexindex score, higher is better 53 · 52 of 243 measured | 29.5 | 29.7 |
| GPQA Diamond% of questions, higher is better 21 · 5 of 231 measured | 92.3% | 94.1% |
| Humanity's Last Exam% of questions, higher is better 39 · 16 of 242 measured | 40.5% | 47.0% |
| SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI) reported by SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI) · 1 result | ||
| Correct answers% of questions, higher is better 18 · 3 of 76 measured | 55.8% | 73.5%high reasoning |
Show all 17 results (10 more)
| Measure | Qwen3.7-Max | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Arena (formerly LMArena) reported by Arena (formerly LMArena) · 1 result | ||
| Tool grounding · AgentIPS effect estimate, higher is better 34 · 35 of 48 measured | 0.00arena agent | -0.00arena agent |
| Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 9 results | ||
| Terminal-Bench 2.1% of tasks, higher is better 33 · 35 of 130 measured | 74.5% | 73.8% |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0% of tasks, higher is better 51 · 45 of 112 measured | 1.5% | 4.0% |
| τ-bench banking% of tasks, higher is better 71 · 46 of 121 measured | 11.8% | 21.4% |
| Artificial Analysis Coding Indexindex score, higher is better 34 · 30 of 131 measured | 66.0 | 68.8 |
| IFBench% of instructions, higher is better 5 · 13 of 195 measured | 80.5% | 77.1% |
| Long-context reasoning (AA-LCR)% of questions, higher is better 50 · 24 of 233 measured | 79.0% | 82.0% |
| SciCode% of problems, higher is better 52 · 12 of 113 measured | 49.5% | 58.7% |
| Terminal-Bench Hard% of tasks, higher is better 12 · 8 of 190 measured | 50.8% | 53.8% |
| τ²-bench telecom% of tasks, higher is better 22 · 16 of 193 measured | 94.7% | 95.6% |
Compare them with other models
Quick answers
Is Qwen3.7-Max better than Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview?
They score about the same, so pick Qwen3.7-Max: it costs 2.0 times less per token.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.7-Max or Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview?
Qwen3.7-Max is cheaper: $2.21 against $4.50 per million tokens, 2.0 times less.
Which is better for agents and tool use, Qwen3.7-Max or Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview ranks 61 of 164 models on sale for multi-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls, against 69 for Qwen3.7-Max.
Which is better for reasoning and knowledge, Qwen3.7-Max or Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview ranks 24 of 198 models on sale for hard questions across science, maths and general knowledge, against 39 for Qwen3.7-Max.
Which is better for sticking to the facts, Qwen3.7-Max or Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview?
Qwen3.7-Max ranks 31 of 152 models on sale for summarising without inventing things, and factual answers, against 34 for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview.
Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3.7-Max or Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 1,048,576 tokens, against 1,000,000 for Qwen3.7-Max.
Run Qwen3.7-Max and Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview on your own prompt
Benchmarks aren't your data. Try both side by side in the playground, with the cost of every answer.