Composer 2.5vsQwen3.7-Max
Composer 2.5 | Qwen3.7-Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Benchmarks | ||
Agentic coding SWE-Bench ProCan the AI fix real bugs in real software? It's handed actual problems from open-source projects and has to write code that genuinely solves them. Higher is better. | 54% | 60.6%Best |
Multilingual coding SWE-Bench MultilingualLike SWE-Bench, but the coding problems span many programming languages, not just one. Tests how broadly the AI can code. Higher is better. | 79.8% | — |
Agentic coding CursorBench v3.2Cursor's own test of harder, real-world coding tasks inside a code editor, on the refreshed v3.2 task set. Scores aren't comparable with v3.1. Higher is better. | 56.1% | — |
Agentic coding CursorBench v3.1Cursor's own test of harder, real-world coding tasks inside a code editor. Higher is better. | 63.2% | — |
Agentic coding DeepSWE 1.0Artificial Analysis' independent test of deep, agentic software-engineering work — the AI has to plan and carry out substantial coding tasks end to end. Higher is better. | 18% | — |
Next.js coding Next.js EvalsVercel's open eval of how well AI coding agents build and migrate real Next.js apps — measured as the share of tasks the agent completes successfully. Higher is better. | 92% | — |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 2.1Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Higher is better. | 73% | — |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 2.0Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? (Version 2.0 of the test.) Higher is better. | 69.3% | 69.7%Best |
Multi-step tool use MCP AtlasCan the AI chain together many tools and steps to complete one bigger task, rather than doing just a single thing? Higher is better. | — | 76.4% |
Science GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | — | 92.4% |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Cursor | Qwen |
| Release date | May 18 2026 | May 20 2026 |
| Access | Proprietary | Proprietary |
Which is better: Composer 2.5 or Qwen3.7-Max?
Qwen3.7-Max leads Composer 2.5 on 2 of the 2 benchmarks they both report (SWE-Bench Pro, Terminal-Bench 2.0). Composer 2.5 shipped 2 days before Qwen3.7-Max, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Published specifications for these two models are limited — see each model page for the latest details.
On SWE-Bench Pro, Qwen3.7-Max leads at 60.6% vs Composer 2.5 at 54%. On Terminal-Bench 2.0, Qwen3.7-Max leads at 69.7% vs Composer 2.5 at 69.3%.
Frequently asked questions
Composer 2.5 was released by Cursor on May 18 2026.
Qwen3.7-Max was released by Qwen on May 20 2026.
Qwen3.7-Max leads on SWE-Bench Pro — Composer 2.5 54% vs Qwen3.7-Max 60.6%.
Other comparisons
Composer 2.5vsClaude Opus 5Qwen3.7-MaxvsClaude Opus 5Composer 2.5vsGPT-5.6 SolQwen3.7-MaxvsGPT-5.6 SolComposer 2.5vsGemini 3.6 FlashQwen3.7-MaxvsGemini 3.6 FlashComposer 2.5vsMuse Spark 1.1Qwen3.7-MaxvsMuse Spark 1.1Composer 2.5vsGrok 4.5Qwen3.7-MaxvsGrok 4.5Composer 2.5vsDeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731Qwen3.7-MaxvsDeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731