Model comparison
o3 vs Qwen3.5 Plus
Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Evidence parity. o3 and Qwen3.5 Plus share 2 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 15 results are unique to o3; 2 to Qwen3.5 Plus.
Updated July 14, 2026- Shared results
- 2
- o3 only
- 15
- Qwen3.5 Plus only
- 2
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick o3 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.5 Plus only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results 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
o3 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 54 to 48. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
o3 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.00 input / $8.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.40 input / $2.40 output per 1M tokens for Qwen3.5 Plus. That is roughly 3.3x on output cost alone. Qwen3.5 Plus gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for o3.
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 | o3 | Δ | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | o314.5 | Margin→ 1.8 | Qwen3.5 Plus16.3 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 18.685%B 21.034%Winner: Qwen3.5 PlusΔ 2.3FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): o3 scored 18.685%; Qwen3.5 Plus scored 21.034%. Qwen3.5 Plus wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | o3 | Qwen3.5 Plus | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | o3$2 input / $8 output | Qwen3.5 Plus$0.4 input / $2.4 output | Qwen3.5 Plus has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | o3118 tok/s | Qwen3.5 PlusNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | o35.38 s | Qwen3.5 PlusNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | o3200K | Qwen3.5 Plus1M | Qwen3.5 Plus lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic2 benchmarks
Coding3 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | o3 | Qwen3.5 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 30.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 82.7% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 20.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -15.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 38.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 87.1% | — | Not comparable |
MathQwen3.5 Plus wins3 benchmarks
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | o3 | Qwen3.5 Plus | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 71.4% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, o3 or Qwen3.5 Plus?
o3 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 54 to 48. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 18.685% and 21.034%.
Which is better for math, o3 or Qwen3.5 Plus?
Qwen3.5 Plus has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 16.3 versus 14.5. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
The AI models change fast. We track them for you.
A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.