Pick Fugu Ultra v2.0 for sakana's own evaluation reports best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 benchmarks tested, including a 74.3 on the deepswe coding-repair benchmark or claims to outperform flagship models like gpt-6 astra and claude fable 5.1 despite its underlying orchestration pool reportedly excluding both of them. Pick Qwen 3.7 Plus for reading screens and interacting with guis or generating code from visual references. On a tight budget at scale, Qwen 3.7 Plus is the value pick.
Fugu Ultra v2.0 (Sakana AI) and Qwen 3.7 Plus (Alibaba) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Fugu Ultra v2.0 is sakana AI's flagship multi-agent orchestration model, claiming best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 self-reported benchmarks against monolithic frontier models — $5/$30 per million tokens. Qwen 3.7 Plus is alibaba's cost-effective multimodal agent in the Qwen3.7 series, built to perceive scenes, read screens and GUIs, generate code from visual references, and navigate mobile apps end-to-end. Their biggest split is price, and the breakdown below shows exactly how that plays out for your workload.
Key differences
Price: Qwen 3.7 Plus is about 13× cheaper on input ($0.4/$1.6 per 1M tokens vs $5/$30 per 1M tokens) — a large enough gap that at scale it can be the single biggest line item in the decision.
Context window: both advertise 1M tokens (~1,500 pages). Tie on paper — test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
Recency: Fugu Ultra v2.0 is the newer model by about 3 months (released September 10, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Specifications
Spec
Fugu Ultra v2.0
Qwen 3.7 Plus
Provider
Sakana AI (Global)
Alibaba (China)
Released
September 10, 2026
June 1, 2026
Context window
1M tokens (~1,500 pages)
1M (~1,500 pages)
Price (in/out)
$5/$30 per 1M tokens
$0.4/$1.6 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
No — API only
No — API only
Modalities
text
text, image, video, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Sakana's own evaluation reports best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 benchmarks tested, including a 74.3 on the DeepSWE coding-repair benchmark: Fugu Ultra v2.0 — Sakana AI's flagship multi-agent orchestration model, claiming best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 self-reported benchmarks against monolithic frontier models — $5/$30 per million tokens — and it is the newer of the two.
Claims to outperform flagship models like GPT-6 Astra and Claude Fable 5.1 despite its underlying orchestration pool reportedly excluding both of them: Fugu Ultra v2.0 — Fugu Ultra v2.0 lists claims to outperform flagship models like GPT-6 Astra and Claude Fable 5.1 despite its underlying orchestration pool reportedly excluding both of them among its strengths; Qwen 3.7 Plus does not.
1M-token context window: Fugu Ultra v2.0 — Fugu Ultra v2.0 lists 1M-token context window among its strengths; Qwen 3.7 Plus does not.
Reading screens and interacting with GUIs: Qwen 3.7 Plus — Alibaba's cost-effective multimodal agent in the Qwen3.7 series, built to perceive scenes, read screens and GUIs, generate code from visual references, and navigate mobile apps end-to-end — and it runs cheaper at $0.4/$1.6 per 1M tokens.
Generating code from visual references: Qwen 3.7 Plus — Qwen 3.7 Plus lists generating code from visual references among its strengths; Fugu Ultra v2.0 does not.
Agentic tool use, verification, and autonomous iteration: Qwen 3.7 Plus — Qwen 3.7 Plus lists agentic tool use, verification, and autonomous iteration among its strengths; Fugu Ultra v2.0 does not.
Lowest cost at scale: Qwen 3.7 Plus — At $0.4/$1.6 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume: Qwen 3.7 Plus — At $0.4/$1.6 per 1M tokens it undercuts Fugu Ultra v2.0, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Anyone whose priority is sakana's own evaluation reports best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 benchmarks tested, including a 74.3 on the deepswe coding-repair benchmark: Fugu Ultra v2.0 — It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is reading screens and interacting with guis: Qwen 3.7 Plus — That is its strongest area.
Fugu Ultra v2.0: where it fits
Sakana AI's flagship multi-agent orchestration model, claiming best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 self-reported benchmarks against monolithic frontier models — $5/$30 per million tokens. Released September 10, 2026 by Sakana AI, it is built for sakana's own evaluation reports best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 benchmarks tested, including a 74.3 on the DeepSWE coding-repair benchmark, claims to outperform flagship models like GPT-6 Astra and Claude Fable 5.1 despite its underlying orchestration pool reportedly excluding both of them, and 1M-token context window.
Its trade-offs are real: not a single trained model — Sakana describes Fugu as "a Multi-Agent System, Delivered as One Model" that dynamically routes tasks across a pool of other models, so head-to-head benchmark framing against monolithic frontier models should be read skeptically, pricing rises to roughly $10/$45 per million tokens for prompts above 272K tokens, and benchmark comparisons against GPT-6 Astra and Claude Fable 5.1 are Sakana's own self-reported figures, not independently verified head-to-head scores. At $5 in / $30 out per million tokens, it sits in the premium price band.
Qwen 3.7 Plus: where it fits
Alibaba's cost-effective multimodal agent in the Qwen3.7 series, built to perceive scenes, read screens and GUIs, generate code from visual references, and navigate mobile apps end-to-end. Released June 1, 2026 by Alibaba, it is built for reading screens and interacting with GUIs, generating code from visual references, agentic tool use, verification, and autonomous iteration, and cost-effective vision-language processing at 1M context.
Its trade-offs: proprietary and API-only, with no downloadable weights, and outputs text only, no image, audio, or video generation. At $0.4 in / $1.6 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
Fugu Ultra v2.0 and Qwen 3.7 Plus overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. Qwen 3.7 Plus costs less per token; and each leads in its own area — Fugu Ultra v2.0 for sakana's own evaluation reports best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 benchmarks tested, including a 74.3 on the deepswe coding-repair benchmark, Qwen 3.7 Plus for reading screens and interacting with guis. Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.
Frequently asked questions
Is Fugu Ultra v2.0 or Qwen 3.7 Plus 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, Fugu Ultra v2.0 leans toward sakana's own evaluation reports best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 benchmarks tested, including a 74.3 on the deepswe coding-repair benchmark while Qwen 3.7 Plus leans toward reading screens and interacting with guis, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Fugu Ultra v2.0 or Qwen 3.7 Plus?
Qwen 3.7 Plus is cheaper — $5/$30 per 1M tokens vs $0.4/$1.6 per 1M tokens, roughly 13× apart on input.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both advertise 1M tokens (~1,500 pages). Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both Fugu Ultra v2.0 and Qwen 3.7 Plus together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Fugu Ultra v2.0, Qwen 3.7 Plus 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, Fugu Ultra v2.0 or Qwen 3.7 Plus?
Fugu Ultra v2.0 — released September 10, 2026, about 3 months after Qwen 3.7 Plus.
Fugu Ultra v2.0 vs Qwen 3.7 Plus
Sakana AI · Global | Alibaba · China · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick Fugu Ultra v2.0 for sakana's own evaluation reports best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 benchmarks tested, including a 74.3 on the deepswe coding-repair benchmark or claims to outperform flagship models like gpt-6 astra and claude fable 5.1 despite its underlying orchestration pool reportedly excluding both of them. Pick Qwen 3.7 Plus for reading screens and interacting with guis or generating code from visual references. On a tight budget at scale, Qwen 3.7 Plus is the value pick.
Fugu Ultra v2.0 (Sakana AI) and Qwen 3.7 Plus (Alibaba) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Fugu Ultra v2.0 is sakana AI's flagship multi-agent orchestration model, claiming best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 self-reported benchmarks against monolithic frontier models — $5/$30 per million tokens. Qwen 3.7 Plus is alibaba's cost-effective multimodal agent in the Qwen3.7 series, built to perceive scenes, read screens and GUIs, generate code from visual references, and navigate mobile apps end-to-end. Their biggest split is price, and the breakdown below shows exactly how that plays out for your workload.
Key differences at a glance
▸Price: Qwen 3.7 Plus is about 13× cheaper on input ($0.4/$1.6 per 1M tokens vs $5/$30 per 1M tokens) — a large enough gap that at scale it can be the single biggest line item in the decision.
▸Context window: both advertise 1M tokens (~1,500 pages). Tie on paper — test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
▸Recency: Fugu Ultra v2.0 is the newer model by about 3 months (released September 10, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
Spec
Fugu Ultra v2.0
Qwen 3.7 Plus
Provider
Sakana AI (Global)
Alibaba (China)
Released
September 10, 2026
June 1, 2026
Context window
1M tokens (~1,500 pages)
1M (~1,500 pages)
Price (in/out)
$5/$30 per 1M tokens
$0.4/$1.6 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
No — API only
No — API only
Modalities
text
text, image, video, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Sakana's own evaluation reports best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 benchmarks tested, including a 74.3 on the DeepSWE coding-repair benchmark
Fugu Ultra v2.0
Sakana AI's flagship multi-agent orchestration model, claiming best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 self-reported benchmarks against monolithic frontier models — $5/$30 per million tokens — and it is the newer of the two.
Claims to outperform flagship models like GPT-6 Astra and Claude Fable 5.1 despite its underlying orchestration pool reportedly excluding both of them
Fugu Ultra v2.0
Fugu Ultra v2.0 lists claims to outperform flagship models like GPT-6 Astra and Claude Fable 5.1 despite its underlying orchestration pool reportedly excluding both of them among its strengths; Qwen 3.7 Plus does not.
1M-token context window
Fugu Ultra v2.0
Fugu Ultra v2.0 lists 1M-token context window among its strengths; Qwen 3.7 Plus does not.
Reading screens and interacting with GUIs
Qwen 3.7 Plus
Alibaba's cost-effective multimodal agent in the Qwen3.7 series, built to perceive scenes, read screens and GUIs, generate code from visual references, and navigate mobile apps end-to-end — and it runs cheaper at $0.4/$1.6 per 1M tokens.
Generating code from visual references
Qwen 3.7 Plus
Qwen 3.7 Plus lists generating code from visual references among its strengths; Fugu Ultra v2.0 does not.
Agentic tool use, verification, and autonomous iteration
Qwen 3.7 Plus
Qwen 3.7 Plus lists agentic tool use, verification, and autonomous iteration among its strengths; Fugu Ultra v2.0 does not.
Lowest cost at scale
Qwen 3.7 Plus
At $0.4/$1.6 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ Qwen 3.7 Plus
At $0.4/$1.6 per 1M tokens it undercuts Fugu Ultra v2.0, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Anyone whose priority is sakana's own evaluation reports best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 benchmarks tested, including a 74.3 on the deepswe coding-repair benchmark
→ Fugu Ultra v2.0
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is reading screens and interacting with guis
→ Qwen 3.7 Plus
That is its strongest area.
Fugu Ultra v2.0: where it fits
Sakana AI's flagship multi-agent orchestration model, claiming best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 self-reported benchmarks against monolithic frontier models — $5/$30 per million tokens. Released September 10, 2026 by Sakana AI, it is built for sakana's own evaluation reports best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 benchmarks tested, including a 74.3 on the DeepSWE coding-repair benchmark, claims to outperform flagship models like GPT-6 Astra and Claude Fable 5.1 despite its underlying orchestration pool reportedly excluding both of them, and 1M-token context window.
Its trade-offs are real: not a single trained model — Sakana describes Fugu as "a Multi-Agent System, Delivered as One Model" that dynamically routes tasks across a pool of other models, so head-to-head benchmark framing against monolithic frontier models should be read skeptically, pricing rises to roughly $10/$45 per million tokens for prompts above 272K tokens, and benchmark comparisons against GPT-6 Astra and Claude Fable 5.1 are Sakana's own self-reported figures, not independently verified head-to-head scores. At $5 in / $30 out per million tokens, it sits in the premium price band.
Qwen 3.7 Plus: where it fits
Alibaba's cost-effective multimodal agent in the Qwen3.7 series, built to perceive scenes, read screens and GUIs, generate code from visual references, and navigate mobile apps end-to-end. Released June 1, 2026 by Alibaba, it is built for reading screens and interacting with GUIs, generating code from visual references, agentic tool use, verification, and autonomous iteration, and cost-effective vision-language processing at 1M context.
Its trade-offs: proprietary and API-only, with no downloadable weights, and outputs text only, no image, audio, or video generation. At $0.4 in / $1.6 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
Fugu Ultra v2.0 and Qwen 3.7 Plus overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. Qwen 3.7 Plus costs less per token; and each leads in its own area — Fugu Ultra v2.0 for sakana's own evaluation reports best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 benchmarks tested, including a 74.3 on the deepswe coding-repair benchmark, Qwen 3.7 Plus for reading screens and interacting with guis. Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.
Want both Fugu Ultra v2.0 and Qwen 3.7 Plus 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 Fugu Ultra v2.0 or Qwen 3.7 Plus 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, Fugu Ultra v2.0 leans toward sakana's own evaluation reports best-or-joint-best results on 5 of 8 benchmarks tested, including a 74.3 on the deepswe coding-repair benchmark while Qwen 3.7 Plus leans toward reading screens and interacting with guis, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Fugu Ultra v2.0 or Qwen 3.7 Plus?
Qwen 3.7 Plus is cheaper — $5/$30 per 1M tokens vs $0.4/$1.6 per 1M tokens, roughly 13× apart on input.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both advertise 1M tokens (~1,500 pages). Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both Fugu Ultra v2.0 and Qwen 3.7 Plus together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Fugu Ultra v2.0, Qwen 3.7 Plus 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, Fugu Ultra v2.0 or Qwen 3.7 Plus?
Fugu Ultra v2.0 — released September 10, 2026, about 3 months after Qwen 3.7 Plus.
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.