Roboflow

Qwen3.7 Plus vs Qwen3.8 Max

Compare Qwen3.7 Plus and Qwen3.8 Max side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, Open Prompt, Classification, Object Detection, and OCR.

Compare Qwen3.7 Plus vs Qwen3.8 Max live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
QwenQwen3.7 Plus
Run to compare this model.
QwenQwen3.8 Max
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Qwen3.7 Plus vs Qwen3.8 Max on Vision Evals

Qwen3.8 Max scores higher on all five Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Reasoning, where Qwen3.8 Max leads 75.9% to 39.7%.

Overall, Qwen3.7 Plus averages 58.9% (#37 of 63) against 79.3% (#8 of 63) for Qwen3.8 Max.

Qwen3.7 Plus is both cheaper ($0.0008 vs $0.0080 per sample) and faster (7.8s vs 18.9s per sample).

Qwen3.7 PlusQwen3.8 Max

Qwen3.7 Plus vs Qwen3.8 Max Comparison Table

Evals updated October 13, 2026Pricing updated October 16, 2026

PropertyQwen3.7 PlusQwen3.8 Max
OrganizationQwenQwen
Categoryclosedclosed
Modality—multimodal
Release DateJun 2026Aug 2026
Context Window—984K
ParametersUnknown2.4T total, ~95B active
LicenseUnknownApache 2.0
Commercial useSee license termsfree for commercial use
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.320No published price
Output $/1M$1.28No published price
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
ClassificationDemoDemo
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Chart Question AnsweringNot listedSupported
Document Question AnsweringNot listedSupported
Image TaggingNot listedSupported
Multi-Label ClassificationNot listedSupported
Vision LanguageNot listedSupported
Model Features
Foundation VisionNot listedSupported
LLMs with Vision CapabilitiesNot listedSupported
Multimodal VisionNot listedSupported
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
58.9%
79.3%
Avg cost / sample$0.0008$0.0080
Avg speed / sample7.77s18.95s
By task
Object Detection (low)
60.1%
$0.0013
76.7%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 76.5 to 77.1
$0.012
Object Detection (high)–
78.4%
±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.1 to 78.9
$0.030
Counting (low)
50.0%
$0.0004
81.1%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 82.4
$0.0046
Counting (high)–
81.1%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.1 to 81.1
$0.0091
Identification (low)
84.4%
$0.0003
88.5%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 90.6
$0.0027
Identification (high)–
89.6%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 90.6
$0.0037
OCR (low)
60.3%
$0.0009
74.0%
$0.0077
by category
Single value
53.5%
Transcription
86.7%
Structured JSON
75.8%
Text localization
23.1%
Single value
63.9%
Transcription
95.2%
Structured JSON
85.4%
Text localization
59.0%
OCR (high)
65.5%
$0.0042
71.8%
$0.028
by category
Single value
58.3%
Transcription
89.7%
Structured JSON
81.3%
Text localization
30.4%
Single value
61.7%
Transcription
94.8%
Structured JSON
81.6%
Text localization
59.6%
Reasoning (low)
39.7%
$0.0003
75.9%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 73.5 to 77.5
$0.0048
Reasoning (high)
68.2%
$0.0043
80.3%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.2 to 82.1
$0.011

Qwen3.7 Plus vs Qwen3.8 Max: Overview

Qwen3.7 Plus
No description available
Qwen3.8 Max

Qwen3.8 Max is the flagship tier of Alibaba's Qwen3.8 family, a sparse mixture-of-experts multimodal model with roughly 2.4 trillion total parameters of which about 95 billion activate per token, which keeps serving cost and latency well below what the total parameter count would imply. It builds on the architectural foundation established by Qwen3.5 and accepts text, images, video, and documents as input while producing text output. Reported context handling reaches close to one million tokens, with a maximum generation length of 131,072 tokens, so the model is aimed at long-horizon agentic work such as repository-scale coding, multi-step research, data analysis, and office document workflows.

For vision work the model performs image and video understanding, document and chart interpretation, text recognition inside images, and grounded visual question answering, and Alibaba reports gains concentrated in multimodal and agentic evaluation categories rather than general reasoning. Published figures include 86.6 on Terminal-Bench 2.1, 67.7 on SWE-bench Pro, 93.0 on PaperBench, 82.8 on IFBench, and 92.6 on GPQA Diamond. It is the first model in the Max tier of the Qwen line for which the team states weights will be released publicly, alongside a smaller Qwen3.8 27B checkpoint. No training or safety model card has been published.