Alibaba Cloud (Qwen)Qwen3.7-MaxVSMistral AIMinistral 3 14B
Our Take
Standardized reasoning and coding benchmarks are currently pending verification for one or both of these models. We recommend testing Qwen3.7-Max and Ministral 3 14B directly in their respective provider playgrounds to see which fits your specific prompt styles best.
Was this recommendation helpful?
Benchmarks & Scores
Coding (swe-bench-pro)
60.6%complex codebases, multi-file repositories, and architectural planning
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)
92.4%graduate-level science QA
Cost & Context
Cost (per 1M tokens)
$3.75Input: $2.50 | Output: $7.50Context WindowLarger
1.05M tokensBenchmarks & Scores
Coding (swe-bench-pro)
N/Acomplex codebases, multi-file repositories, and architectural planning
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)
N/Agraduate-level science QA
Cost & Context
Cost (per 1M tokens)18.8x cheaper
$0.20Input: $0.20 | Output: $0.20Context Window
262.14k tokensFrequently Asked Questions about Qwen3.7-Max vs Ministral 3 14B
Ministral 3 14B is cheaper than Qwen3.7-Max. Ministral 3 14B has a blended cost of $0.20/1M tokens, which is about 18.8x cheaper than Qwen3.7-Max at $3.75/1M tokens.
Related Matchups
Explore similar comparisons for Qwen3.7-Max and Ministral 3 14B.
Do you want to find a model for your constraints?
Use our interactive model finder to filter LLMs by reasoning capability, coding performance, cost, and context length.