Model comparison
GPT-4o vs Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)
Head-to-head evidence from 1 shared benchmark result across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: GPT-4o #165 (Supported); Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) #66 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GPT-4o and Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) share 1 comparable benchmark result. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 12 results are unique to GPT-4o; 1 to Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning).
Updated July 20, 2026- Shared results
- 1
- GPT-4o only
- 12
- Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) only
- 1
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-4o only becomes the better choice if you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 1 shared benchmark result across 1 evidence category; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 58.01 to 41.49. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)'s sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 6.4 against 0.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), 0.345% to 8.481%.
GPT-4o is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.50 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning). That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) is the reasoning model in the pair, while GPT-4o is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | GPT-4o | Δ | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | GPT-4o0.3 | Margin→ 6.1 | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)6.4 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 0.345%B 8.481%Winner: Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)Δ 8.1FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): GPT-4o scored 0.345%; Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) scored 8.481%. Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GPT-4o | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GPT-4o$2.5 input / $10 output | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)$0 input / $0 output | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GPT-4o131 tok/s | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GPT-4o0.81 s | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GPT-4o128K | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)128K | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-4o | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 25.1% | — | Not comparable |
Coding1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-4o | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-SciCodeSource | 33.3% | — | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-4o | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 11.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 54.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 3.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -10.7% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 19.7% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 37.9% | — | Not comparable |
MathQwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) wins2 benchmarks
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-4o | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 864 | — | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-4o | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 34.3% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, GPT-4o or Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)?
Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 58.01 to 41.49. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 0.345% and 8.481%.
Which is better for math, GPT-4o or Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)?
Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 6.4 versus 0.3. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.