DeepSeek V4 Flash 0420 (High) vs Qwen3.7 Max
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0420 (High) by DeepSeek or Qwen3.7 Max by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3.7 Max scores 5.1 points higher (29.5 vs 24.4) but costs 19× as much to run the benchmark ($2277 vs $121; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.7 Max when you need intelligence above 24.4, and DeepSeek V4 Flash 0420 (High) when 24.4 is enough.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Flash 0420 (High) | Qwen3.7 Max | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 24.4 | 29.5 | +20.9% Qwen3.7 Max is 20.9% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $121.20 | $2,277.12 | +1778.8% Qwen3.7 Max is 19× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | Not reported | 16.63s | — not comparable |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.11 / $0.23 | $2.50 / $7.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text |
Qwen3.7 Max vs DeepSeek V4 Flash 0420 (High): 20.9% more intelligence, 1778.8% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and end-to-end time not fully reported.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- DeepSeek V4 Flash 0420 (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores 37.90 for $110.
- 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 V4 Flash 0420 (High)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-v4-flash-0420-high/qwen3-7-max · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-flash-0420-high/qwen3-7-max?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill