Model comparison
o1 vs Qwen Turbo
o1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 300× less per token, which makes it the better buy when o1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. o1 scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen Turbo in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where o1 leads 36.1 to 15.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 73.3% for o1 and 6.1% for Qwen Turbo.
- Qwen Turbo is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $60 for o1.
- Qwen Turbo accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 200K.
Side by side
| o1 | Qwen Turbo | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 40.9 | 27.1 |
| Released | 2024-09-12 | 2024-11-01 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 200K | 1M |
| Max output | 100K | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $15 | $0.05 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $60 | $0.20 |
| Results tracked | 52 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
o1: 46.1 (#70), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 61.7% | — |
| WeirdML | 47.6% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 69.7% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1367 | — |
| CadEval | 56% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 89% | — |
| MBPP+ | 80.2% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
o1: 24.6 (#117), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 10% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 51.1% | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
o1: 27.9 (#111), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 41.7% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 30.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 15% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 5.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 91.6% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1371 | — |
| DTBench | 74.7% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 65.5% | — |
| LMCA | 22.3% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 141.91 | — |
| LiveBench | 75.7% | — |
Math o1 leads
o1: 36.1 (#175), Qwen Turbo: 15.3 (#297)
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 73.3% | 6.1% |
| MATH Level 5 | 94.7% | 56.2% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 14.7% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 80.3% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1388 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 9.3% | — |
Knowledge o1 leads
o1: 41.5 (#110), Qwen Turbo: 22.2 (#272)
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 76.8% | 41.8% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 41.1% | — |
| Confabulations | 11.7% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1361 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
o1: 34.2 (#93), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1168 | — |
| GeoBench | 80% | — |
| VPCT | 37% | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 41.4% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
o1: 48.6 (#142), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1358 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1394 | — |
| LMArena French | 1344 | — |
| LMArena German | 1337 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1346 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1396 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1356 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1345 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
o1: 74.8 (#86), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 81.5% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1367 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
o1: 50.3 (#9), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 83.3% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1378 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
o1: 55.6 (#144), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1366 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1348 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 70.2% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1369 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 65.4% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is o1 better than Qwen Turbo?
o1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 300× less per token, which makes it the better buy when o1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, o1 or Qwen Turbo?
Qwen Turbo is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; o1 lists at $15 and $60.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen Turbo does, with 1M tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do o1 and Qwen Turbo share?
3 benchmarks have published results for both models. o1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Turbo has 3.