Model comparison

o1-pro vs Qwen3.8 Max

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 31.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

o1-pro OpenAI

31.5

Rank #271 Reported

Qwen3.8 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

56.8

Rank #22 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.8 Max leads 54.4 to 20.4.
  • Qwen3.8 Max is cheaper at $2 / $6 per million input/output tokens, against $150 / $600 for o1-pro.
  • Qwen3.8 Max accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 200K.

Side by side

o1-pro and Qwen3.8 Max specifications
o1-proQwen3.8 Max
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index31.556.8
Released2025-03-192026-08-02
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window200K1M
Max output100K131K
Input $ / M tokens$150$2
Output $ / M tokens$600$6
Results tracked339

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

o1-pro: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 53.5 (#29)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.8 Max
DeepSWE—57.5%
LMArena WebDev—1674
FrontierSWE—17.8%
SciCode—53.2%
LMArena Coding—1502

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

o1-pro: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 45.4 (#14)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.8 Max
APEX-Agents—63.3%
τ²-bench Banking—55.1%
GDP.pdf—23.2%

Reasoning Qwen3.8 Max leads

o1-pro: 20.4 (#239), Qwen3.8 Max: 54.4 (#26)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.8 Max
NYT Connections (extended)—88.3%
ARC-AGI-123.3%—
CritPt—20%
Chess Puzzles—40%
EnigmaEval6.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts—1496
Mystery Game Puzzles—38%
DTBench—92%
LMCA—46.2%
Epoch Capabilities Index—156.41

Math Not comparable

o1-pro: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 73.2 (#20)

Math benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.8 Max
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—74.7%
FrontierMath Tier 4—46.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—100%
ProofBench—58%
LMArena Math—1499

Knowledge Qwen3.8 Max leads

o1-pro: 29.7 (#234), Qwen3.8 Max: 61.7 (#27)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.8 Max
GPQA Diamond—92.7%
Humanity's Last Exam8.1%—
SimpleQA Verified—47.3%
LMArena Expert—1507

Multimodal Not comparable

o1-pro: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 37.2 (#75)

Multimodal benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Vision—1314
Furniture Assembly—20%

Multilingual Not comparable

o1-pro: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 56.7 (#18)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Non-English—1472
LMArena Chinese—1538
LMArena French—1503
LMArena German—1483
LMArena Japanese—1467
LMArena Korean—1461
LMArena Russian—1481
LMArena Spanish—1492

Instruction Following Not comparable

o1-pro: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 77.6 (#17)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Instruction Following—1479

Long Context Not comparable

o1-pro: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 45.6 (#31)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Longer Query—1489

Writing & Preference Not comparable

o1-pro: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 67.1 (#30)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmarko1-proQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Text—1483
LMArena Creative Writing—1479
LMArena Multi-Turn—1489

Frequently asked questions

Is o1-pro better than Qwen3.8 Max?

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 31.5 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, o1-pro or Qwen3.8 Max?

Qwen3.8 Max is cheaper. It lists at $2 per million input tokens and $6 per million output tokens; o1-pro lists at $150 and $600.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.8 Max does, with 1M tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do o1-pro and Qwen3.8 Max share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. o1-pro has 3 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 Max has 39.

Related comparisons

Go deeper