o1 vs Qwen3.7 Plus
Updated October 21, 2026. 44 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
Decision reading
Only Qwen3.7 Plus has a coding score, 33.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; o1 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Compare them on price, context and the boards below.
- Shared results
- 44
- o1 only
- 24
- Qwen3.7 Plus only
- 31
- Like-for-like categories
- 7 of 9
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only Qwen3.7 Plus has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Qwen3.7 Plus
Qwen3.7 Plus leads, 25.2 against 15.2.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Qwen3.7 Plus has a AA Agentic Index result, 17.5.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only o1 has a GPQA Diamond result, 73.2%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only o1 has a AIME result, 71.5%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only o1 has a MMLU Pro result, 83.5%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Qwen3.7 Plus has a Design Arena: websites result, 1269.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Qwen3.7 Plus
Qwen3.7 Plus takes 1M tokens against 200K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3.7 Plus
o1 $0.045, Qwen3.7 Plus $0.0010 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- o1 not benchmarked, Qwen3.7 Plus 33.2 from 2 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Agentic work, 30.4 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run): o1 12.9% against Qwen3.7 Plus 47.0%, 34.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- o1 $60.00 against Qwen3.7 Plus $1.28 per million output tokens, 46.9x apart.
- Context window
- o1 takes 200K tokens, Qwen3.7 Plus 1M.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | o1 | Bars | Qwen3.7 Plus | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 4 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 2 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 6 | ||
| Math | 0 | 4 | ||
| Knowledge | 0 | 4 | ||
| General | 0 | 23 | ||
| All shared boards | 0 | 44 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index04
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aider polyglot | 61.7% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| AA Coding Index | 39.7 | 55.9 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 50.3% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 46.4% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | Not measured | 12.9% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 52.8% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| SkillsBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 54.3% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 67.9% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 46.1% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 12.9% | 47.0% | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| FrontierCode | Not measured | 10.2% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| WeirdML | 46.1% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1367 | 1473 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1366 | 1473 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 15.2 | 25.2 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 141.7 | 147.0 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | Not measured | 17.5 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | Not measured | 38.2% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 10.5% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 16.4% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | Not measured | 49.3% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 62.6% | 93.0% | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| METR time horizons | 51.1% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| OSWorld 2.0 | Not measured | 2.8% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 73.2% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| MMMU Pro (Vals AI) | 77.4% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 74.7% | 90.0% | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 7.0% | 35.6% | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 76.8% | 87.9% | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| ARC-AGI | 30.7% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| SimpleBench | 40.1% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| Chess puzzles | 10.0% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | Not measured | 17.0% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| VPCT | 37.0% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1371 | 1460 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1361 | 1466 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1372 | 1460 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Vision: diagrams | Not measured | 1292 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Vision: homework | Not measured | 1295 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | 71.5% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| MATH 500 (Vals AI) | 90.4% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| MGSM (Vals AI) | 89.3% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 73.3% | 93.3% | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 14.7% | 34.4% | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| MATH level 5 | 94.7% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1388 | 1467 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1390 | 1470 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | 83.5% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 80.4% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 74.3% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | Not measured | 66.2% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | 96.5% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 84.1% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| SimpleQA Verified | 41.1% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| GeoBench | 80.0% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1369 | 1464 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1355 | 1464 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1368 | 1451 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1328 | 1435 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | Not measured | 1269 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | Not measured | 1261 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | Not measured | 1262 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | Not measured | 1275 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | Not measured | 1239 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | Not measured | 1269 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Design Arena: SVG | Not measured | 1208 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | Not measured | 1144 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index023
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAGE (Vals AI) | Not measured | 39.3% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Vals Multimodal Index | Not measured | 53.9% | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| IFBench | 70.3% | 78.0% | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 65.0% | 73.0% | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| DTBench | 74.7% | 84.0% | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMCA | 22.3% | 37.6% | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 83.3% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| Creative writing (Lech Mazur) | 70.2% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text | 1366 | 1454 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1367 | 1439 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1347 | 1438 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Vision | 1168 | 1278 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: English | 1372 | 1458 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1358 | 1445 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1394 | 1509 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: German | 1337 | 1471 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1346 | 1412 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1396 | 1413 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: French | 1344 | 1472 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1345 | 1457 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1356 | 1457 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: Polish | Not measured | 1449 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1355 | 1459 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1378 | 1454 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1360 | 1437 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1358 | 1422 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Vision: English | 1162 | 1280 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Vision: Chinese | 1235 | 1332 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
| LMArena Vision: reading text | Not measured | 1288 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Vision: humor | Not measured | 1261 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Vision: creative writing | Not measured | 1258 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| LMArena Document | Not measured | 1444 | Only Qwen3.7 Plus measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3.7 Plus costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3.7 Plus costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3.7 Plus costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | OpenAI o1 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | No public weights listed |
| Released | December 17, 2024 | June 3, 2026 |
| Context window | 200K | 1M |
| Input $/Mtok | $15.00 | $0.32 |
| Output $/Mtok | $60.00 | $1.28 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 33.2 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 2 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is o1 better than Qwen3.7 Plus for coding?
Only Qwen3.7 Plus has a coding score, 33.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; o1 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.
Which is cheaper, o1 or Qwen3.7 Plus?
o1 costs $15.00 per million input tokens and $60.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Plus costs $0.32 and $1.28. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, o1 or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus, with 1M tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks is the o1 vs Qwen3.7 Plus comparison based on?
44 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. o1's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.7 Plus's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.