Real head-to-head · same prompt, one shot

Qwen 3.7 vs Fugu Mini

Multilingual open-weights — strong on Chinese reasoning. vs Fugu's fast mini variant — single model, no panel, ~3 min per build.

Head-to-head verdict: Qwen 3.7 wins 1–0.

Qwen 3.7 · context256K tokens
Fugu Mini · contextSakana subscription · same key as Ultra
Qwen 3.7 · priceOpen weights · free for individuals
Fugu Mini · priceSame Sakana subscription pool as Fugu Ultra
Qwen 3.7 · vendorAlibaba
Fugu Mini · 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 Mini, side by side, on 5 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 Mini · Dispatched from Agent OS as the fast Sakana lane. Bench scored by Claude judge against the same 42 prompts.

Side-by-side on 27 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 Mini
Game
🥉Qwen 3.7 on Arcade
Fugu Mini on Arcade
Page
Qwen 3.7 on Landing
Fugu Mini on Landing
Sim
Fugu Mini on Fluid
Sim
Qwen 3.7 on Orbit
Fugu Mini on Orbit
Visual
Qwen 3.7 on Voxel
Fugu Mini on Voxel
Game
— not attempted —
Fugu Mini on Crypt
Game
— not attempted —
Fugu Mini on Doom
Game
— not attempted —
Fugu Mini on Game
Game
— not attempted —
Fugu Mini on Neoncity
Game
— not attempted —
Fugu Mini on Outrun
Game
— not attempted —
Fugu Mini on Skyrim
Sim
— not attempted —
Fugu Mini on Blackhole
Sim
— not attempted —
Fugu Mini on Boids
Sim
— not attempted —
Fugu Mini on Cloth
Sim
— not attempted —
Fugu Mini on Fractal
Sim
— not attempted —
Fugu Mini on Galaxy
— not attempted —
Fugu Mini on Pathtracer
— not attempted —
Fugu Mini on Reactiondiff
Sim
— not attempted —
Sim
— not attempted —
Fugu Mini on Wormhole
Visual
— not attempted —
Fugu Mini on Aurora
Visual
— not attempted —
Fugu Mini on Fireworks
Visual
— not attempted —
Fugu Mini on Lavalamp
Visual
— not attempted —
Fugu Mini on Matrix

Where Qwen 3.7 beat Fugu Mini

The tasks where I gave Qwen 3.7 a higher 0–10 score on the same prompt — with the actual commentary from my source guides.

Voxel Visual
Qwen 3.7 7.0 · Fugu Mini 3.0 (+4.0)

What I saw: GLM built the densest, most colourful city (windowed skyscrapers + speed/coins HUD). Opus ran the furthest with the cleanest motion. Qwen's is atmospheric — a foggy tunnel of buildings — but more muted and it crashes quicker.

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 Mini

Strengths

  • Zero panel orchestration — much lower latency than Ultra
  • Same Sakana subscription, no extra cost
  • Doesn't time out on heavy game/3D prompts where Ultra stalls

Trade-offs

  • Single model only — no ensemble verdict
  • Newer than Ultra — less calibration / verification

Pricing & context — the spec sheet

Spec Qwen 3.7 Fugu Mini
VendorAlibabaSakana AI
Context window256,000 tokensSingle-model variant of Sakana's Fugu — no panel orchestration. Same API endpoint, much faster per call.
PriceOpen weights · free for individualsSame Sakana subscription pool as Fugu Ultra
Pricing detailAlibaba's open-weights release — downloadable from Hugging Face, runnable locally or via Alibaba Cloud's free tier for individuals.The non-Ultra `fugu` model on Sakana's API. Sakana describes it as 'Fast mini model optimized for low latency yet high quality responses.' Crucially: zero orchestration tokens per call (vs Ultra's panel of thousands). Returns in ~3 min instead of 6-15 min and doesn't time out on heavy prompts.
Release2026-062026-06-15
Bench coverage5/5 scored · avg 7.50/102/27 scored · avg 5.50/10

The verdict — which should you pick?

Across 1 scored shared tasks, Qwen 3.7 averaged 7.00/10, beating Fugu Mini's 3.00/10 by 4.00 points. Pick Qwen 3.7 when the build has to ship on the first prompt and you can afford the trade-offs in the comparison below.

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 Mini 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, agent loops where latency matters more than panel consensus → Fugu Mini. That's the same setup I run for the 3,600+ founders inside the AI Profit Boardroom.

FAQ — Qwen 3.7 vs Fugu Mini

Which is better, Qwen 3.7 or Fugu Mini?

On Goldie Bench, Qwen 3.7 averages 7.00/10 across the shared tasks, with 0 gold, 0 silver, 1 bronze overall. Fugu Mini averages 3.00/10, with 0 gold, 0 silver, 0 bronze. Qwen 3.7 wins the head-to-head 1–0.

How much does Qwen 3.7 cost vs Fugu Mini?

Qwen 3.7: Alibaba's open-weights release — downloadable from Hugging Face, runnable locally or via Alibaba Cloud's free tier for individuals. Fugu Mini: The non-Ultra `fugu` model on Sakana's API. Sakana describes it as 'Fast mini model optimized for low latency yet high quality responses.' Crucially: zero orchestration tokens per call (vs Ultra's panel of thousands). Returns in ~3 min instead of 6-15 min and doesn't time out on heavy prompts.

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

Qwen 3.7 has a 256,000 tokens context window. Fugu Mini has a Single-model variant of Sakana's Fugu — no panel orchestration. Same API endpoint, much faster per call. context window.

When should I pick Qwen 3.7 over Fugu Mini?

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 Mini over Qwen 3.7?

Pick Fugu Mini for: Agent loops where latency matters more than panel consensus; Quick first-drafts you'll refine downstream; Filling out a bench when Ultra is timing out. The trade-off is the weaknesses we logged on the bench: Single model only — no ensemble verdict; Newer than Ultra — less calibration / verification.

How does Goldie Bench score Qwen 3.7 vs Fugu Mini?

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 3,600+ founders shipping with it every day all live inside the AI Profit Boardroom.

3,600+founders
258documented wins
38countries
$100k+/mocommunity MRR