DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24) vs Qwen3.7 Max
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24) by DeepSeek or Qwen3.7 Max by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3.7 Max scores 21.0 points higher (29.5 vs 8.5) but costs 90× as much to run the benchmark ($2277 vs $25.4; flagship vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.7 Max when you need intelligence above 8.5, and DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24) when 8.5 is enough.
| Metric | DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24) | Qwen3.7 Max | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 8.5 | 29.5 | +247.1% Qwen3.7 Max is 3.5× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $25.37 | $2,277.12 | +8875.6% Qwen3.7 Max is 90× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 10.23s | 16.67s | +63.0% Qwen3.7 Max is 63.0% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.32 / $0.89 | $2.50 / $7.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text |
Qwen3.7 Max vs DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24): 247.1% more intelligence, 8875.6% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 63.0% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Low) scores 21.50 for $10.6.
- Qwen3.7 Max is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24)Qwen3.7 MaxToday's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v3/qwen3-7-max · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v3/qwen3-7-max?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill