Qwen3.5vsQwen3.7-Max
Qwen3.5 | Qwen3.7-Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Specifications | ||
Parameters | 397B | — |
Context window | 1M | — |
| 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. | — | 60.6% |
Coding SWE-Bench VerifiedReal coding tasks pulled from open-source projects — the AI has to find and fix actual bugs. A human-checked version of the original SWE-Bench. Higher is better. | 76.4% | — |
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. | 69.3% | — |
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. | 52.5% | 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% |
Web browsing BrowseCompCan the AI browse the web and track down hard-to-find answers? Higher is better. | 69% | — |
Multidisciplinary reasoning Humanity's Last Exam · no toolsHumanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects, written so you can't just look up the answer. “No tools” means the AI answers on its own. Higher is better. | 28.7% | — |
Science GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 88.4% | 92.4%Best |
Agentic computer use OSWorld-VerifiedCan the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Higher is better. | 62.2% | — |
Chart reasoning CharXiv ReasoningCan the AI read and reason about complex charts and figures, not just text? Higher is better. | 80.8% | — |
Multimodal reasoning MMMU-ProA tougher version of MMMU — college-level questions that mix images, diagrams, and text together. Higher is better. | 79% | — |
Multimodal MMMUTests the AI on understanding images and text together across many college subjects. Higher is better. | 85% | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Qwen | Qwen |
| Release date | Feb 16 2026 | May 20 2026 |
| Access | Open Weight | Proprietary |
Which is better: Qwen3.5 or Qwen3.7-Max?
Qwen3.7-Max leads Qwen3.5 on 2 of the 2 benchmarks they both report (Terminal-Bench 2.0, GPQA Diamond). Qwen3.5 shipped 93 days before Qwen3.7-Max, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Qwen3.5 is open weight, while Qwen3.7-Max is proprietary.
On Terminal-Bench 2.0, Qwen3.7-Max leads at 69.7% vs Qwen3.5 at 52.5%. On GPQA Diamond, Qwen3.7-Max leads at 92.4% vs Qwen3.5 at 88.4%.
Frequently asked questions
Qwen3.5 was released by Qwen on Feb 16 2026.
Qwen3.7-Max was released by Qwen on May 20 2026.
Qwen3.7-Max leads on Terminal-Bench 2.0 — Qwen3.5 52.5% vs Qwen3.7-Max 69.7%.
Qwen3.7-Max leads on GPQA Diamond — Qwen3.5 88.4% vs Qwen3.7-Max 92.4%.
Qwen3.5 is an open weight model released by Qwen. Qwen3.7-Max is a proprietary model released by Qwen.