How do Qwen3.7 Plus and Qwen3.8 27B compare on coding benchmarks?

The comparison table shows SWE-bench, SWE-Pro, SWE-Atlas, Terminal-Bench, DeepSWE, and coding agent index scores for both Qwen3.7 Plus and Qwen3.8 27B when publicly disclosed.

LLM Comparison

Qwen3.7 Plus vs Qwen3.8 27B: benchmark scores, pricing & comparison.

Q: Which is better: Qwen3.7 Plus or Qwen3.8 27B?

AskClash compares Qwen3.7 Plus and Qwen3.8 27B side by side across SWE-bench, GPQA, HLE, Terminal-Bench, coding agent scores, token pricing, AskClash ACB, and context window so you can see which model wins on each benchmark.

Side-by-side Qwen3.7 Plus vs Qwen3.8 27B comparison across SWE-bench, GPQA, HLE, Terminal-Bench, coding agent scores, token pricing, context window, and AskClash RWT. Green marks the winner on each benchmark.

Open live leaderboard Qwen3.7 Plus model page Qwen3.8 27B model page

Rank #28 vs #29AskClash overall scores 56.3 vs 56.3.

Pricing $0.40/$1.60 vs $0.45/$3.20Input and output token prices per 1M tokens when published.

Proprietary vs Open WeightAlibaba vs Alibaba.

Qwen3.7 Plus vs Qwen3.8 27B benchmark comparison

Green cells highlight the winning model for each metric. Scores are cached from the AskClash LLM leaderboard snapshot.

Metric	Qwen3.7 Plus	Qwen3.8 27B
Overall Score	56.3	56.3
Leaderboard Rank	#28	#29
ACB	—	56.4
RWT	7.5	—
HLE	34.7	30.8
GPQA	90.3	89.2
IFEval	94.6	79.5
SWE-bench	77.7	—
SWE-Pro	57.6	61.7
Terminal-Bench	70.3	73.0
DeepSWE	—	42.2
GDPval-AA	1522.1	1463.2
OSWorld	73.3	84.3
MCP Atlas	73.2	—
Finance Agent	38.2	48.6
CharXiv	85.9	90.2
MMMU-Pro	79.0	76.3
Tau2	93.0	—
MRCR	91.7	—
Input Price (per 1M tokens)	$0.40	$0.45
Output Price (per 1M tokens)	$1.60	$3.20
Context Window	1M	262K
Benchmarks Published	15	13

Qwen3.7 Plus vs Qwen3.8 27B head-to-head charts

Qwen3.7 Plus leads 6 and Qwen3.8 27B leads 5 of 11 shared benchmarks. Qwen3.7 Plus is cheaper on a defined 1M-input / 200K-output workload. Charts show only benchmarks both models publish.

Qwen3.7 PlusQwen3.8 27B

Overall

56.3Qwen3.7 Plus

56.3Qwen3.8 27B

HLE

34.7Qwen3.7 Plus

30.8Qwen3.8 27B

GPQA

90.3Qwen3.7 Plus

89.2Qwen3.8 27B

IFEval

94.6Qwen3.7 Plus

79.5Qwen3.8 27B

SWE-Pro

57.6Qwen3.7 Plus

61.7Qwen3.8 27B

Terminal-Bench

70.3Qwen3.7 Plus

73.0Qwen3.8 27B

GDPval-AA

1522.1Qwen3.7 Plus

1463.2Qwen3.8 27B

OSWorld

73.3Qwen3.7 Plus

84.3Qwen3.8 27B

Finance Agent

38.2Qwen3.7 Plus

48.6Qwen3.8 27B

CharXiv

85.9Qwen3.7 Plus

90.2Qwen3.8 27B

MMMU-Pro

79.0Qwen3.7 Plus

76.3Qwen3.8 27B

Qwen3.7 Plus

Input$0.40

Output$1.60

Workload$0.72

Context1M

Qwen3.8 27B

Input$0.45

Output$3.20

Workload$1.09

Context262K

Workload = published cost of 1M input + 200K output tokens. Open the live leaderboard for interactive compare charts.

More Qwen3.7 Plus and Qwen3.8 27B comparisons

Explore how Qwen3.7 Plus and Qwen3.8 27B stack up against other top-ranked LLMs.

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Qwen3.7 Plus Claude Fable 5.1 vs Qwen3.8 27B Claude Fable 5 vs Qwen3.7 Plus Claude Fable 5 vs Qwen3.8 27B Claude Opus 5 vs Qwen3.7 Plus Claude Opus 5 vs Qwen3.8 27B GPT-5.6 Sol vs Qwen3.7 Plus GPT-5.6 Sol vs Qwen3.8 27B Qwen3.8 Max vs Qwen3.7 Plus Qwen3.8 Max vs Qwen3.8 27B

How to read this comparison

Benchmark scores

Higher is better for all benchmark scores (SWE-bench, GPQA, HLE, Terminal-Bench, etc.). Green marks the model with the higher score.

Token pricing

Lower is better for input and output prices. Green marks the cheaper model per 1M tokens.

Coverage matters

Models with fewer disclosed benchmark cells may have inflated percentile scores. Check the benchmark cell count for context.

This comparison page is generated from the AskClash LLM leaderboard cache. Open the live leaderboard for real-time scores and interactive filtering.