Get the Agent OS + join 4,000+ founders inside the AI Profit Boardroom → Join AIPB ($59/mo)
Real head-to-head · same prompt, one shot

Qwen 3.7 vs Fugu Ultra 1.1

Multilingual open-weights — strong on Chinese reasoning. vs Sakana's multi-agent orchestrator, v1.1 — routes experts per request.

Qwen 3.7 · context256K tokens
Fugu Ultra 1.1 · context1M tokens
Qwen 3.7 · priceOpen weights · free for individuals
Fugu Ultra 1.1 · priceAPI · orchestration billed
Qwen 3.7 · vendorAlibaba
Fugu Ultra 1.1 · vendorSakana AI

What I tested — same prompt, two models

I run the same fixed prompt set through every new model the day it drops — same string, one shot, single HTML file out — and I score the result 0–10 on whether it ran, how close it hit the brief, and how good it looked. Below is what came out when I gave the exact same prompts to Qwen 3.7 and Fugu Ultra 1.1, side by side, on 0 shared tasks inside the Agent Operating System.

Both models were given identical prompts inside the Agent Operating System — no help, no iteration, no "best of N" tricks. I run each prompt once, save the HTML file the model produces, and score it 0–10 on whether it ran, how close it hit the brief, and how good it looked. The scoring is mine. The verdicts below are pulled from my source comparison guides at agentos.guide where I publish every score and the reasoning behind it.

Qwen 3.7 · Wired alongside GLM-5.2 in Agent OS for open-weights agent loops where you want vendor diversity.

Fugu Ultra 1.1 · Benched on GoldieBench via Sakana's Responses API (fugu-ultra-v1.1, xhigh reasoning). Game tasks use the skill-infused threejs-game-director prompt plus a controls+graphics fix loop with an anti-regression clamp, judged on a real mid-play frame by the same Opus judge as the field.

Side-by-side on 47 shared tasks

Click any cell to play that model's actual one-shot attempt. Medals are derived from my 0–10 scores per task (highest = 🥇, second = 🥈, third = 🥉).

Task ↓
Qwen 3.7
Fugu Ultra 1.1
Game
Qwen 3.7 on Arcade
— not attempted —
Game
Qwen 3.7 on Crypt
— not attempted —
Game
Qwen 3.7 on Dogfight
— not attempted —
Game
Qwen 3.7 on Doom
— not attempted —
Qwen 3.7 on Dragonflight
— not attempted —
Qwen 3.7 on Dragonrealm
— not attempted —
Game
Qwen 3.7 on Flightsim
— not attempted —
Game
Qwen 3.7 on Game
— not attempted —
Game
Qwen 3.7 on Gtadrive
— not attempted —
Game
Qwen 3.7 on Gtafoot
— not attempted —
Qwen 3.7 on Neonblaster
— not attempted —
Game
Qwen 3.7 on Neoncity
— not attempted —
Game
Qwen 3.7 on Neonracer
— not attempted —
Qwen 3.7 on Nordiccrypt
— not attempted —
Game
Qwen 3.7 on Outrun
— not attempted —
Game
Qwen 3.7 on Parachute
— not attempted —
Game
Qwen 3.7 on Pool
— not attempted —
Game
Qwen 3.7 on Racing
— not attempted —
Game
Qwen 3.7 on Raycaster
— not attempted —
Game
Qwen 3.7 on Rpg
— not attempted —
Game
Qwen 3.7 on Skyrim
— not attempted —
Qwen 3.7 on Twilightvale
— not attempted —
Game
Qwen 3.7 on Voxelcraft
— not attempted —
Page
Qwen 3.7 on Aipbpromo
— not attempted —

Strengths & weaknesses I logged

Qwen 3.7

Strengths

  • Open weights, free for individuals — same model class as GLM-5.2
  • Best-of-three on fluid simulation in the Goldie Bench bench
  • Multilingual depth — Chinese reasoning especially strong

Trade-offs

  • Only 5 tasks scored on the bench so far — small sample size
  • Trails GLM-5.2 on cinematic visual builds at similar pricing

Fugu Ultra 1.1

Strengths

  • Orchestrates 1-3 expert agents per request and synthesises their answers
  • Reported SWE-Bench Pro 73.7 — above Opus 4.8 and GPT-5.5 on Sakana's table
  • OpenAI- and Anthropic-compatible API — drop-in for Codex and Claude Code

Trade-offs

  • Benched as a partial run until the full 50-task batch completes
  • Region-locked: unavailable across the EU/EEA/UK/CH — access depends on where you are

Pricing & context — the spec sheet

Spec Qwen 3.7 Fugu Ultra 1.1
VendorAlibabaSakana AI
Context window256,000 tokens1,000,000-token context window
PriceOpen weights · free for individualsAPI · orchestration billed
Pricing detailAlibaba's open-weights release — downloadable from Hugging Face, runnable locally or via Alibaba Cloud's free tier for individuals.Sakana's Fugu Ultra v1.1 — a multi-agent system served as a model: an orchestrator routes each request across one to three expert agents and synthesises the answer. Reported (v1.0): SWE-Bench Pro 73.7, LiveCodeBench 93.2, GPQA Diamond 95.5. NOTE: Sakana geo-blocks the EU/EEA/UK/Switzerland pending GDPR compliance — benched from an allowed region.
Release2026-062026-07
Bench coverage47/47 scored · avg 7.00/100/0 scored · avg —

The verdict — which should you pick?

Not enough scored shared tasks yet for a head-to-head average. The live demos for both are on the matrix above — play them and form your own opinion.

If you only run one of these inside your stack, the head-to-head average above is the call. If you can run both, my honest play is to wire Qwen 3.7 and Fugu Ultra 1.1 both into the Agent Operating System and dispatch each from the kanban by task type — open-weights alternative to glm-5.2 when you want a different model family → Qwen 3.7, hard, high-stakes coding and reasoning where answer quality beats latency → Fugu Ultra 1.1. That's the same setup I run for the 4,000+ founders inside the AI Profit Boardroom.

FAQ — Qwen 3.7 vs Fugu Ultra 1.1

Which is better, Qwen 3.7 or Fugu Ultra 1.1?

On Goldie Bench, Qwen 3.7 averages no scored verdicts yet across the shared tasks, with 0 gold, 0 silver, 0 bronze overall. Fugu Ultra 1.1 averages no scored verdicts yet, with 0 gold, 0 silver, 0 bronze. Not enough scored shared tasks yet to call a winner.

How much does Qwen 3.7 cost vs Fugu Ultra 1.1?

Qwen 3.7: Alibaba's open-weights release — downloadable from Hugging Face, runnable locally or via Alibaba Cloud's free tier for individuals. Fugu Ultra 1.1: Sakana's Fugu Ultra v1.1 — a multi-agent system served as a model: an orchestrator routes each request across one to three expert agents and synthesises the answer. Reported (v1.0): SWE-Bench Pro 73.7, LiveCodeBench 93.2, GPQA Diamond 95.5. NOTE: Sakana geo-blocks the EU/EEA/UK/Switzerland pending GDPR compliance — benched from an allowed region.

What's the context window for Qwen 3.7 vs Fugu Ultra 1.1?

Qwen 3.7 has a 256,000 tokens context window. Fugu Ultra 1.1 has a 1,000,000-token context window context window.

When should I pick Qwen 3.7 over Fugu Ultra 1.1?

Pick Qwen 3.7 for: Open-weights alternative to GLM-5.2 when you want a different model family; Multilingual workloads (Chinese, multi-script content); Fluid and particle simulations. The trade-off is the weaknesses we logged on the bench: Only 5 tasks scored on the bench so far — small sample size; Trails GLM-5.2 on cinematic visual builds at similar pricing.

When should I pick Fugu Ultra 1.1 over Qwen 3.7?

Pick Fugu Ultra 1.1 for: Hard, high-stakes coding and reasoning where answer quality beats latency; Agentic workflows in Codex / Claude Code via the drop-in provider config; One-shot builds you want a panel of experts on, not a single model. The trade-off is the weaknesses we logged on the bench: Benched as a partial run until the full 50-task batch completes; Region-locked: unavailable across the EU/EEA/UK/CH — access depends on where you are.

How does Goldie Bench score Qwen 3.7 vs Fugu Ultra 1.1?

Every demo on this page was built by Julian Goldie inside the Agent Operating System — same fixed prompt for both models, one shot, single HTML file out. Each result gets a 0–10 score on whether it ran, how close it hit the brief, and how good it looked. The highest score on each task gets gold; second gets silver; third gets bronze. See methodology for full provenance.

The same stack Julian uses

Run this stack yourself.

Every demo on this bench was built inside the Agent Operating System — one prompt, one shot, single HTML file out. The Agent OS, the prompts, the templates, the weekly walkthroughs and 4,000+ founders shipping with it every day all live inside the AI Profit Boardroom.

4,000+founders
258documented wins
38countries
$59/momonthly