Qwen3.7-MaxvsComposer 2.5
Qwen3.7-Max | Composer 2.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins | ||
Input priceWhat you pay for everything you send the model — your question, plus any documents or earlier conversation you include with it. | $2.50 | — |
Output priceWhat you pay for the text the model writes back. It is normally the dearer half: producing an answer costs more than reading one. | $7.50 | — |
| Benchmarks | ||
SWE-Bench ProAgentic coding — Can 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% | 54% |
Terminal-Bench 2.0Agentic terminal coding — Can 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. | 69.7% | 69.3% |
| BenchmarksPublished by one model only | ||
BullshitBench v2Nonsense detection — Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | 71% | — |
SWE-Bench VerifiedCoding — Real 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. | 80.4% | — |
SWE-Bench MultilingualMultilingual coding — Like 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% |
DeepSWE 1.0Agentic coding — Artificial 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 EvalsNext.js coding — Vercel'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. | — | 81% |
LiveCodeBenchCompetitive coding — Coding problems published so recently the AI can't have seen them in training — a contamination-free test of raw programming skill. Higher is better. | 91.6% | — |
Terminal-Bench 2.1Agentic terminal coding — Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Higher is better. | — | 73% |
MCP AtlasMulti-step tool use — Can 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% | — |
Humanity's Last Exam · with toolsMultidisciplinary reasoning — Humanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects. “With tools” means the AI is allowed to search the web or run code while answering. Higher is better. | 41.4% | — |
GPQA DiamondScience — Graduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 92.4% | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Qwen | SpaceXAI |
| Release date | May 20 2026 | May 18 2026 |
| Access | Proprietary | Proprietary |
Other comparisons
Qwen3.7-MaxvsClaude Fable 5.1Composer 2.5vsClaude Fable 5.1Qwen3.7-MaxvsGPT-6 AstraComposer 2.5vsGPT-6 AstraQwen3.7-MaxvsGemini 3.8 FlashComposer 2.5vsGemini 3.8 FlashQwen3.7-MaxvsMuse Spark 1.3Composer 2.5vsMuse Spark 1.3Qwen3.7-MaxvsDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813Composer 2.5vsDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813Qwen3.7-MaxvsMistral Medium 3.5Composer 2.5vsMistral Medium 3.5
Frequently asked questions
Qwen3.7-Max leads Composer 2.5 on 2 of the 2 benchmarks they both report (SWE-Bench Pro, Terminal-Bench 2.0). Only Qwen3.7-Max has a verified first-party API price: $2.50 per million input tokens and $7.50 per million output tokens. No pay-as-you-go API rate is tracked for Composer 2.5. 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%.