ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3.7 Plus vs Qwen3.6 27B

Qwen3.7 Plus comes out ahead, 70 to 65 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.7 Plus

    Released Jun 2, 2026

    70/100
    • ECI147.4
    • Price$0.40 / $1.60
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.7 Plus

  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.6 27B

    Released Apr 22, 2026

    65/100
    • ECI146.5
    • Price$0.60 / $3.60
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.6 27B

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Qwen3.7 Plus is our pick

Qwen3.7 Plus is the better all-round choice, scoring 70/100 against Qwen3.6 27B (65). It leads on price and context window. Qwen3.6 27B wins on inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityQwen3.7 PlusCapabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.7 Plus 147.4 · Qwen3.6 27B 146.5
  • Lowest priceQwen3.7 PlusQwen3.7 Plus $0.70 · Qwen3.6 27B $1.35 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3.7 PlusQwen3.7 Plus 1,000,000 · Qwen3.6 27B 262,144 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.6 27BQwen3.7 Plus: Text, Images, Video · Qwen3.6 27B: Text, Images, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingQwen3.6 27BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3.7 PlusQwen3.6 27B
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%7574
Price25%5744
Inputs & features15%8090
Context window10%6037
Overall100%70/10065/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Qwen3.7 Plus vs Qwen3.6 27B specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3.7 PlusAlibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.6 27BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)147.4 (best)146.5
ECI rank#61 of 148 (best)#68 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions87.9% (best)85.9%
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics34.4%35.1% (best)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics93.3% (best)91.1%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.40 (best)$0.60
Output$1.60 (best)$3.60
Cached input$0.04—
Blended (3:1)$0.70 (best)$1.35
Long-context rateOver 256K: $1.20 / $4.80Same rate
Price sourceOfficial Alibaba APIOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens (best)262,144 tokens
Max output64,000 tokens65,536 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoYes
VideoYesYes
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpen
API model IDqwen3.7-plusqwen3.6-27b
API providers2527 (best)
ReleasedJun 2, 2026Apr 22, 2026
Knowledge cutoffApr 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 Plus$7.20
  • Qwen3.6 27B$13.20
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3.7 Plus or Qwen3.6 27B?

Qwen3.7 Plus is the better all-round choice, scoring 70/100 against Qwen3.6 27B (65). It leads on price and context window. Qwen3.6 27B wins on inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.7 Plus or Qwen3.6 27B?

Qwen3.7 Plus is cheaper at $0.40 input / $1.60 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Qwen3.6 27B costs $0.60 input / $3.60 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.70 per million tokens for Qwen3.7 Plus versus $1.35 for Qwen3.6 27B (1.9× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Qwen3.7 Plus scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.7 Plus 147.4 (#61 of 148) and Qwen3.6 27B 146.5 (#68 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (145.7–148.9 vs 144.2–147.9), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Qwen3.7 Plus 87.9%, Qwen3.6 27B 85.9%; FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — Qwen3.6 27B 35.1%, Qwen3.7 Plus 34.4%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3.7 Plus 93.3%, Qwen3.6 27B 91.1%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3.7 Plus and Qwen3.6 27B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen3.7 Plus leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 262,144 for Qwen3.6 27B. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.7 Plus up to 64,000, Qwen3.6 27B up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3.7 Plus accepts text, images and video; Qwen3.6 27B accepts text, images, audio and video. Qwen3.6 27B handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Qwen3.6 27B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen3.7 Plus is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.7 Plus is the newest, released Jun 2, 2026. Qwen3.6 27B came out Apr 22, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen3.7 Plus Apr 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