Model comparison

o1-pro vs Qwen3.5 27B

Qwen3.5 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.9 to 31.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

o1-pro OpenAI

31.5

Rank #271 Reported

Qwen3.5 27B Alibaba (Qwen)

41.9

Rank #127 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.5 27B leads 38.0 to 29.7.
  • Qwen3.5 27B is cheaper at $0.30 / $2.40 per million input/output tokens, against $150 / $600 for o1-pro.
  • Qwen3.5 27B accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 200K.
  • Qwen3.5 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

o1-pro and Qwen3.5 27B specifications
o1-proQwen3.5 27B
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index31.541.9
Released2025-03-192026-02-23
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K262K
Max output100K66K
Input $ / M tokens$150$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$600$2.40
Results tracked328

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

o1-pro: —, Qwen3.5 27B: 38.9 (#168)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.5 27B
LMArena WebDev—1358
WeirdML—39.5%
LMArena Coding—1427
ALE-Bench—349.45

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

o1-pro: —, Qwen3.5 27B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.5 27B
Vending-Bench 2—201.98

Reasoning Qwen3.5 27B leads

o1-pro: 20.4 (#239), Qwen3.5 27B: 27.5 (#117)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.5 27B
NYT Connections (extended)—47.9%
ARC-AGI-123.3%—
EnigmaEval6.1%—
Thematic Generalization—45.5%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1414
DTBench—82.4%
LMCA—34%

Math Not comparable

o1-pro: —, Qwen3.5 27B: 38.8 (#127)

Math benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.5 27B
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—56.7%
LMArena Math—1429

Knowledge Qwen3.5 27B leads

o1-pro: 29.7 (#234), Qwen3.5 27B: 38.0 (#150)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.5 27B
Humanity's Last Exam8.1%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—12.1%
LMArena Expert—1428

Multimodal Not comparable

o1-pro: —, Qwen3.5 27B: 39.4 (#59)

Multimodal benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Vision—1241

Multilingual Not comparable

o1-pro: —, Qwen3.5 27B: 50.8 (#115)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Non-English—1390
LMArena Chinese—1478
LMArena French—1410
LMArena German—1393
LMArena Japanese—1345
LMArena Korean—1358
LMArena Russian—1390
LMArena Spanish—1407

Instruction Following Not comparable

o1-pro: —, Qwen3.5 27B: 73.5 (#119)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Instruction Following—1393

Long Context Not comparable

o1-pro: —, Qwen3.5 27B: 43.1 (#106)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Longer Query—1413

Writing & Preference Not comparable

o1-pro: —, Qwen3.5 27B: 59.3 (#111)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.5 27B
LMArena Text—1409
LMArena Creative Writing—1362
LMArena Multi-Turn—1410

Frequently asked questions

Is o1-pro better than Qwen3.5 27B?

Qwen3.5 27B is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.9 to 31.5 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, o1-pro or Qwen3.5 27B?

Qwen3.5 27B is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $2.40 per million output tokens; o1-pro lists at $150 and $600.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5 27B does, with 262K tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do o1-pro and Qwen3.5 27B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. o1-pro has 3 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 27B has 28.

Related comparisons

Go deeper