Pick Atria Dawn Preview for best-in-class among tested models on several of shanghai ai lab's own benchmarks, including browsecomp (92.5, ahead of gpt-5.6 sol's 92.2) and deepsearchqa (96.0) or 744b-parameter moe built on a glm-5.2 base, released under a fully open mit license. Pick Step 3.7 Flash for a 198b-parameter sparse moe vision-language model (11b active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows or scmp reported it 'outshines larger rivals' from deepseek and moonshot on some benchmarks despite its smaller active size. On a tight budget at scale, Atria Dawn Preview is the value pick.
Atria Dawn Preview (Shanghai AI Laboratory) and Step 3.7 Flash (StepFun) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Atria Dawn Preview is a free, MIT-licensed 744B open-weight model from Shanghai AI Lab that beat GPT-5.6 Sol on the BrowseComp benchmark — released quietly, weights before paper. Step 3.7 Flash is stepFun's 198B MoE vision-language model built for coding and search agents - a distinct Chinese lab with genuinely competitive open weights. Their biggest split is price, and the breakdown below shows exactly how that plays out for your workload.
Key differences
Context window: both advertise 256K tokens (~393 pages). Tie on paper — test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
Recency: Atria Dawn Preview is the newer model by about 4 months (released September 11, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Specifications
Spec
Atria Dawn Preview
Step 3.7 Flash
Provider
Shanghai AI Laboratory (China)
StepFun (China)
Released
September 11, 2026
May 29, 2026
Context window
256K tokens (~393 pages)
256K (~393 pages)
Price (in/out)
Open weight (self-host / free)
$0.2/$1.15 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
Yes — self-hostable
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text
text, image, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Best-in-class among tested models on several of Shanghai AI Lab's own benchmarks, including BrowseComp (92.5, ahead of GPT-5.6 Sol's 92.2) and DeepSearchQA (96.0): Atria Dawn Preview — A free, MIT-licensed 744B open-weight model from Shanghai AI Lab that beat GPT-5.6 Sol on the BrowseComp benchmark — released quietly, weights before paper — and it is the newer of the two.
744B-parameter MoE built on a GLM-5.2 base, released under a fully open MIT license: Atria Dawn Preview — Atria Dawn Preview lists 744B-parameter MoE built on a GLM-5.2 base, released under a fully open MIT license among its strengths; Step 3.7 Flash does not.
Free to self-host — no API pricing, run entirely on your own hardware: Atria Dawn Preview — Atria Dawn Preview lists free to self-host — no API pricing, run entirely on your own hardware among its strengths; Step 3.7 Flash does not.
A 198B-parameter sparse MoE vision-language model (11B active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows: Step 3.7 Flash — Atria Dawn Preview is comparatively weak here — a lab research preview rather than a commercial product — support and update cadence are unclear
SCMP reported it 'outshines larger rivals' from DeepSeek and Moonshot on some benchmarks despite its smaller active size: Step 3.7 Flash — Atria Dawn Preview is comparatively weak here — context window is reported inconsistently across trackers — most list 256K tokens, at least one lists 1M; unconfirmed which is accurate
Open weights (Apache 2.0) at a low per-token price: Step 3.7 Flash — Step 3.7 Flash lists open weights (Apache 2.0) at a low per-token price among its strengths; Atria Dawn Preview does not.
Lowest cost at scale: Atria Dawn Preview — Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of Step 3.7 Flash's $0.2/$1.15 per 1M tokens.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume: Atria Dawn Preview — At Open weight (self-host / free) it undercuts Step 3.7 Flash, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Anyone whose priority is best-in-class among tested models on several of shanghai ai lab's own benchmarks, including browsecomp (92.5, ahead of gpt-5.6 sol's 92.2) and deepsearchqa (96.0): Atria Dawn Preview — It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is a 198b-parameter sparse moe vision-language model (11b active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows: Step 3.7 Flash — That is its strongest area.
Atria Dawn Preview: where it fits
A free, MIT-licensed 744B open-weight model from Shanghai AI Lab that beat GPT-5.6 Sol on the BrowseComp benchmark — released quietly, weights before paper. Released September 11, 2026 by Shanghai AI Laboratory, it is built for best-in-class among tested models on several of Shanghai AI Lab's own benchmarks, including BrowseComp (92.5, ahead of GPT-5.6 Sol's 92.2) and DeepSearchQA (96.0), 744B-parameter MoE built on a GLM-5.2 base, released under a fully open MIT license, and free to self-host — no API pricing, run entirely on your own hardware.
Its trade-offs are real: context window is reported inconsistently across trackers — most list 256K tokens, at least one lists 1M; unconfirmed which is accurate, released quietly, with weights and an API posted to GitHub before Shanghai AI Lab's own technical report went up on arXiv days later, and a lab research preview rather than a commercial product — support and update cadence are unclear. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.
Step 3.7 Flash: where it fits
StepFun's 198B MoE vision-language model built for coding and search agents - a distinct Chinese lab with genuinely competitive open weights. Released May 29, 2026 by StepFun, it is built for a 198B-parameter sparse MoE vision-language model (11B active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows, sCMP reported it 'outshines larger rivals' from DeepSeek and Moonshot on some benchmarks despite its smaller active size, open weights (Apache 2.0) at a low per-token price, and includes a 1.8B vision encoder for image understanding alongside text.
Its trade-offs: stepFun is a newer, less established lab than DeepSeek, Alibaba, or Moonshot, benchmark 'outshines rivals' claims are from press coverage of specific tests, not a full independent leaderboard sweep, and smaller ecosystem and less third-party documentation than the more established Chinese labs. At $0.2 in / $1.15 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
Atria Dawn Preview and Step 3.7 Flash overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. Atria Dawn Preview costs less per token; and each leads in its own area — Atria Dawn Preview for best-in-class among tested models on several of shanghai ai lab's own benchmarks, including browsecomp (92.5, ahead of gpt-5.6 sol's 92.2) and deepsearchqa (96.0), Step 3.7 Flash for a 198b-parameter sparse moe vision-language model (11b active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows. Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.
Frequently asked questions
Is Atria Dawn Preview or Step 3.7 Flash better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Atria Dawn Preview leans toward best-in-class among tested models on several of shanghai ai lab's own benchmarks, including browsecomp (92.5, ahead of gpt-5.6 sol's 92.2) and deepsearchqa (96.0) while Step 3.7 Flash leans toward a 198b-parameter sparse moe vision-language model (11b active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Atria Dawn Preview or Step 3.7 Flash?
Atria Dawn Preview is cheaper — Open weight (self-host / free) vs $0.2/$1.15 per 1M tokens.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both advertise 256K tokens (~393 pages). Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both Atria Dawn Preview and Step 3.7 Flash together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Atria Dawn Preview, Step 3.7 Flash and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Atria Dawn Preview or Step 3.7 Flash?
Atria Dawn Preview — released September 11, 2026, about 4 months after Step 3.7 Flash.
Atria Dawn Preview vs Step 3.7 Flash
Shanghai AI Laboratory · China | StepFun · China · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick Atria Dawn Preview for best-in-class among tested models on several of shanghai ai lab's own benchmarks, including browsecomp (92.5, ahead of gpt-5.6 sol's 92.2) and deepsearchqa (96.0) or 744b-parameter moe built on a glm-5.2 base, released under a fully open mit license. Pick Step 3.7 Flash for a 198b-parameter sparse moe vision-language model (11b active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows or scmp reported it 'outshines larger rivals' from deepseek and moonshot on some benchmarks despite its smaller active size. On a tight budget at scale, Atria Dawn Preview is the value pick.
Atria Dawn Preview (Shanghai AI Laboratory) and Step 3.7 Flash (StepFun) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Atria Dawn Preview is a free, MIT-licensed 744B open-weight model from Shanghai AI Lab that beat GPT-5.6 Sol on the BrowseComp benchmark — released quietly, weights before paper. Step 3.7 Flash is stepFun's 198B MoE vision-language model built for coding and search agents - a distinct Chinese lab with genuinely competitive open weights. Their biggest split is price, and the breakdown below shows exactly how that plays out for your workload.
Key differences at a glance
▸Context window: both advertise 256K tokens (~393 pages). Tie on paper — test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
▸Recency: Atria Dawn Preview is the newer model by about 4 months (released September 11, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
Spec
Atria Dawn Preview
Step 3.7 Flash
Provider
Shanghai AI Laboratory (China)
StepFun (China)
Released
September 11, 2026
May 29, 2026
Context window
256K tokens (~393 pages)
256K (~393 pages)
Price (in/out)
Open weight (self-host / free)
$0.2/$1.15 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
Yes — self-hostable
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text
text, image, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Best-in-class among tested models on several of Shanghai AI Lab's own benchmarks, including BrowseComp (92.5, ahead of GPT-5.6 Sol's 92.2) and DeepSearchQA (96.0)
Atria Dawn Preview
A free, MIT-licensed 744B open-weight model from Shanghai AI Lab that beat GPT-5.6 Sol on the BrowseComp benchmark — released quietly, weights before paper — and it is the newer of the two.
744B-parameter MoE built on a GLM-5.2 base, released under a fully open MIT license
Atria Dawn Preview
Atria Dawn Preview lists 744B-parameter MoE built on a GLM-5.2 base, released under a fully open MIT license among its strengths; Step 3.7 Flash does not.
Free to self-host — no API pricing, run entirely on your own hardware
Atria Dawn Preview
Atria Dawn Preview lists free to self-host — no API pricing, run entirely on your own hardware among its strengths; Step 3.7 Flash does not.
A 198B-parameter sparse MoE vision-language model (11B active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows
Step 3.7 Flash
Atria Dawn Preview is comparatively weak here — a lab research preview rather than a commercial product — support and update cadence are unclear
SCMP reported it 'outshines larger rivals' from DeepSeek and Moonshot on some benchmarks despite its smaller active size
Step 3.7 Flash
Atria Dawn Preview is comparatively weak here — context window is reported inconsistently across trackers — most list 256K tokens, at least one lists 1M; unconfirmed which is accurate
Open weights (Apache 2.0) at a low per-token price
Step 3.7 Flash
Step 3.7 Flash lists open weights (Apache 2.0) at a low per-token price among its strengths; Atria Dawn Preview does not.
Lowest cost at scale
Atria Dawn Preview
Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of Step 3.7 Flash's $0.2/$1.15 per 1M tokens.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ Atria Dawn Preview
At Open weight (self-host / free) it undercuts Step 3.7 Flash, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Anyone whose priority is best-in-class among tested models on several of shanghai ai lab's own benchmarks, including browsecomp (92.5, ahead of gpt-5.6 sol's 92.2) and deepsearchqa (96.0)
→ Atria Dawn Preview
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is a 198b-parameter sparse moe vision-language model (11b active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows
→ Step 3.7 Flash
That is its strongest area.
Atria Dawn Preview: where it fits
A free, MIT-licensed 744B open-weight model from Shanghai AI Lab that beat GPT-5.6 Sol on the BrowseComp benchmark — released quietly, weights before paper. Released September 11, 2026 by Shanghai AI Laboratory, it is built for best-in-class among tested models on several of Shanghai AI Lab's own benchmarks, including BrowseComp (92.5, ahead of GPT-5.6 Sol's 92.2) and DeepSearchQA (96.0), 744B-parameter MoE built on a GLM-5.2 base, released under a fully open MIT license, and free to self-host — no API pricing, run entirely on your own hardware.
Its trade-offs are real: context window is reported inconsistently across trackers — most list 256K tokens, at least one lists 1M; unconfirmed which is accurate, released quietly, with weights and an API posted to GitHub before Shanghai AI Lab's own technical report went up on arXiv days later, and a lab research preview rather than a commercial product — support and update cadence are unclear. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.
Step 3.7 Flash: where it fits
StepFun's 198B MoE vision-language model built for coding and search agents - a distinct Chinese lab with genuinely competitive open weights. Released May 29, 2026 by StepFun, it is built for a 198B-parameter sparse MoE vision-language model (11B active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows, sCMP reported it 'outshines larger rivals' from DeepSeek and Moonshot on some benchmarks despite its smaller active size, open weights (Apache 2.0) at a low per-token price, and includes a 1.8B vision encoder for image understanding alongside text.
Its trade-offs: stepFun is a newer, less established lab than DeepSeek, Alibaba, or Moonshot, benchmark 'outshines rivals' claims are from press coverage of specific tests, not a full independent leaderboard sweep, and smaller ecosystem and less third-party documentation than the more established Chinese labs. At $0.2 in / $1.15 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
Atria Dawn Preview and Step 3.7 Flash overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. Atria Dawn Preview costs less per token; and each leads in its own area — Atria Dawn Preview for best-in-class among tested models on several of shanghai ai lab's own benchmarks, including browsecomp (92.5, ahead of gpt-5.6 sol's 92.2) and deepsearchqa (96.0), Step 3.7 Flash for a 198b-parameter sparse moe vision-language model (11b active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows. Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.
Want both Atria Dawn Preview and Step 3.7 Flash without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.
Is Atria Dawn Preview or Step 3.7 Flash better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Atria Dawn Preview leans toward best-in-class among tested models on several of shanghai ai lab's own benchmarks, including browsecomp (92.5, ahead of gpt-5.6 sol's 92.2) and deepsearchqa (96.0) while Step 3.7 Flash leans toward a 198b-parameter sparse moe vision-language model (11b active) built specifically for agentic coding and search workflows, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Atria Dawn Preview or Step 3.7 Flash?
Atria Dawn Preview is cheaper — Open weight (self-host / free) vs $0.2/$1.15 per 1M tokens.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both advertise 256K tokens (~393 pages). Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both Atria Dawn Preview and Step 3.7 Flash together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Atria Dawn Preview, Step 3.7 Flash and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Atria Dawn Preview or Step 3.7 Flash?
Atria Dawn Preview — released September 11, 2026, about 4 months after Step 3.7 Flash.
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.