ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3.7 Max vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview comes out ahead, 68 to 58 on our weighted score, though Qwen3.7 Max is 17% cheaper per token.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.7 Max

    Released May 21, 2026

    58/100
    • ECI153.7
    • Price$2.50 / $7.50
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.7 Max
  2. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview

    Released Feb 19, 2026

    68/100
    • ECI154.8
    • Price$2.00 / $12.00
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is our pick

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against Qwen3.7 Max (58). It leads on inputs & features. Qwen3.7 Max wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewCapabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview 154.8 · Qwen3.7 Max 153.7
  • Lowest priceQwen3.7 MaxQwen3.7 Max $3.75 · Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview $4.50 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGemini 3.1 Pro Preview 1,048,576 · Qwen3.7 Max 1,000,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewQwen3.7 Max: Text · Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3.7 MaxGemini 3.1 Pro Preview
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%8384
Price25%2319
Inputs & features15%35100
Context window10%6061
Overall100%58/10068/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Qwen3.7 Max vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3.7 MaxAlibaba (Qwen)Gemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGoogle
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)153.7154.8 (best)
ECI rank#37 of 148#31 of 148 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions90.9%94.4% (best)
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics64.6% (best)59.7%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics95.6%95.6% (best)
SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues77.3% (best)75.6%
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions55.8%73.5% (best)
Price per million tokens
Input$2.50$2.00 (best)
Output$7.50 (best)$12.00
Cached input$0.50$0.20 (best)
Blended (3:1)$3.75 (best)$4.50
Long-context rateSame rateOver 200K: $4.00 / $18.00
Price sourceOfficial Alibaba APIOfficial Google API
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens1,048,576 tokens (best)
Max output65,536 tokens65,536 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoYes
PDFsNoYes
AudioNoYes
VideoNoYes
ReasoningYesYeslow · medium · high
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
API model IDqwen3.7-maxgemini-3.1-pro-preview
API providers2626
ReleasedMay 21, 2026Feb 19, 2026
Knowledge cutoff—Jan 2025
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Qwen3.7 Max$40.00
  • Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview$44.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3.7 Max or Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview?

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against Qwen3.7 Max (58). It leads on inputs & features. Qwen3.7 Max wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.7 Max or Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview?

Qwen3.7 Max is cheaper at $2.50 input / $7.50 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview costs $2.00 input / $12.00 output per million tokens (official Google API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $3.75 per million tokens for Qwen3.7 Max versus $4.50 for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview (1.2× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview 154.8 (#31 of 148) and Qwen3.7 Max 153.7 (#37 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (152.6–157.3 vs 151.9–156.0), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview 94.4%, Qwen3.7 Max 90.9%; FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — Qwen3.7 Max 64.6%, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview 59.7%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview 95.6%, Qwen3.7 Max 95.6%; SWE-bench Verified — Qwen3.7 Max 77.3%, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview 75.6%; SimpleQA Verified — Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview 73.5%, Qwen3.7 Max 55.8%.

Which is better for coding?

Qwen3.7 Max resolves more real GitHub issues on SWE-bench Verified: Qwen3.7 Max 77.3% and Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview 75.6%. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 1,000,000 for Qwen3.7 Max. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.7 Max up to 65,536, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3.7 Max accepts text; Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

No. Qwen3.7 Max and Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.7 Max is the newest, released May 21, 2026. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview came out Feb 19, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview Jan 2025.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons