GPT-5.2 vs Qwen3.7 Max
Side-by-side benchmark comparison across coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing.
Qwen3.7 Max by Alibaba wins on 5 of 6 benchmarks against GPT-5.2 by OpenAI, which leads on 1. This head-to-head comparison covers coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing metrics from our benchmark data.
Category-by-Category Breakdown
Coding: In coding, Qwen3.7 Max scores 1277 on Design Arena ELO compared to GPT-5.2's 1173, while Qwen3.7 Max scores 1285 on Website Arena ELO compared to GPT-5.2's 1167.
Context: In context, Qwen3.7 Max scores 1.0M on Context Length compared to GPT-5.2's 400K.
Pricing Comparison
GPT-5.2 costs $1.8/1M input tokens and $14.0/1M output tokens, while Qwen3.7 Max costs $1.5/1M input and $4.4/1M output. Qwen3.7 Max is the more affordable option for API usage.
Verdict
Qwen3.7 Max leads across the board in affordability, making it the stronger overall choice in this comparison.
View Individual Model Pages
GPT-5.2 vs Qwen3.7 Max — FAQ
Which is better, GPT-5.2 or Qwen3.7 Max?
Qwen3.7 Max wins on more benchmarks overall (5 vs 1). However, the best choice depends on your specific needs — each model excels in different areas.
How does GPT-5.2 compare to Qwen3.7 Max for coding?
SWE-bench Verified data is not available for both models. Check the detailed comparison charts above for other coding-related metrics.
Is GPT-5.2 cheaper than Qwen3.7 Max?
Yes, Qwen3.7 Max is cheaper. GPT-5.2 costs $1.8/1M input and $14.0/1M output tokens. Qwen3.7 Max costs $1.5/1M input and $4.4/1M output tokens.
Which is faster, GPT-5.2 or Qwen3.7 Max?
Output speed data is not available for both models. Check the speed section of the comparison above for available performance data.
What benchmarks does the GPT-5.2 vs Qwen3.7 Max comparison cover?
This comparison covers 6 benchmarks including Input Cost, Output Cost, Context Length, Cached Input Cost, Design Arena ELO, Website Arena ELO. Metrics span general intelligence, coding, math, reasoning, speed, and cost categories.