Compare / Qwen3.7 Max vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
Qwen3.7 Max vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
17 results from 3 sources that measured both models. Each row is in the source's own units; there is no overall winner.
| Benchmark | Metric | Qwen3.7 Max | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arena (formerly LMArena)reported | Confirmed task successIPS effect estimate | -0.09 | -0.08 |
| Arena (formerly LMArena)reported | Praise over complaintIPS effect estimate | -0.08 | -0.01 |
| Arena (formerly LMArena)reported | SteerabilityIPS effect estimate | -0.03 | -0.04 |
| Arena (formerly LMArena)reported | Tool groundingIPS effect estimate | -0.00 | -0.00 |
| Artificial Analysisreported | Artificial Analysis Coding Indexindex score | 66.0 | 68.8 |
| Artificial Analysisreported | Artificial Analysis Intelligence Indexindex score | 29.5 | 29.7 |
| Artificial Analysisreported | GPQA Diamond% of questions | 92.3% | 94.1% |
| Artificial Analysisreported | Humanity's Last Exam% of questions | 40.5% | 47.0% |
| Artificial Analysisreported | IFBench% of instructions | 80.5% | 77.1% |
| Artificial Analysisreported | Long-context reasoning (AA-LCR)% of questions | 79.0% | 82.0% |
| Artificial Analysisreported | SciCode% of problems | 49.5% | 58.7% |
| Artificial Analysisreported | Terminal-Bench 2.1% of tasks | 74.5% | 73.8% |
| Artificial Analysisreported | Terminal-Bench 4.0% of tasks | 1.5% | 4.0% |
| Artificial Analysisreported | Terminal-Bench Hard% of tasks | 50.8% | 53.8% |
| Artificial Analysisreported | Τ-bench banking% of tasks | 11.8% | 21.4% |
| Artificial Analysisreported | Τ²-bench telecom% of tasks | 94.7% | 95.6% |
| SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI)reported | Correct answers% of questions | 55.8% | 73.5% |
Bold green marks the better value on that metric. Where a source reports ranges that overlap, the difference may not be meaningful; see the benchmark page for ranges.