Model comparison
o1 vs Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
o1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.6 to 37.7 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct costs 8.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when o1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. o1 scores higher in 9 categories and Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct in 0 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where o1 leads 45.7 to 36.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is WeirdML: 47.6% for o1 and 41.2% for Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct.
- Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct is cheaper at $1.50 / $7.50 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $60 for o1.
- Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 200K.
- Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| o1 | Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 40.6 | 37.7 |
| Released | 2024-09-12 | 2025-04 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 200K | 262K |
| Max output | 100K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $15 | $1.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $60 | $7.50 |
| Results tracked | 52 | 25 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding o1 leads
o1: 45.7 (#64), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 36.2 (#199)
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 47.6% | 41.2% |
| LMArena Coding | 1367 | 1413 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 55.4% |
| Aider Polyglot | 61.7% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1275 |
| GSO | — | 4.9% |
| LiveBench Coding | 69.7% | — |
| CadEval | 56% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 461.45 |
| AlgoTune | — | 1.44 |
| HumanEval+ | 89% | — |
| MBPP+ | 80.2% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Too close to call
o1: 24.3 (#111), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 23.7 (#116)
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 27.2% |
| Cybench | 10% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 51.1% | — |
Reasoning o1 leads
o1: 27.5 (#103), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 24.7 (#141)
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1372 | 1372 |
| SimpleBench | 41.7% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 49.5% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 30.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 15% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 5.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 91.6% | — |
| DTBench | 74.7% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 65.5% | — |
| LMCA | 22.3% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 141.92 | — |
| LiveBench | 75.7% | — |
Math Too close to call
o1: 34.9 (#150), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 34.9 (#151)
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1388 | 1364 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 14.7% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 73.3% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 80.3% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 94.7% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 9.3% | — |
Knowledge o1 leads
o1: 41.5 (#101), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 36.4 (#159)
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1362 | 1337 |
| GPQA Diamond | 76.8% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 41.1% | — |
| Confabulations | 11.7% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
o1: 33.6 (#87), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1168 | — |
| GeoBench | 80% | — |
| VPCT | 37% | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 41.4% | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
o1: 48.8 (#137), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 47.8 (#143)
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | 1345 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1394 | 1356 |
| LMArena French | 1343 | 1394 |
| LMArena German | 1337 | 1324 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1346 | 1309 |
| LMArena Korean | 1396 | 1307 |
| LMArena Russian | 1356 | 1367 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1345 | 1360 |
Instruction Following o1 leads
o1: 75.0 (#82), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 71.8 (#142)
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1368 | 1356 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 81.5% | — |
Long Context o1 leads
o1: 50.3 (#9), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 42.0 (#126)
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1378 | 1379 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 83.3% | — |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
o1: 55.8 (#139), Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: 55.5 (#142)
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1366 | 1356 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1347 | 1333 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1368 | 1365 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 70.2% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 65.4% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is o1 better than Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct?
o1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.6 to 37.7 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct costs 8.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when o1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, o1 or Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct?
Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $1.50 per million input tokens and $7.50 per million output tokens; o1 lists at $15 and $60.
Is o1 or Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct better for coding?
o1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 45.7 versus 36.2 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct does, with 262K tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do o1 and Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct share?
18 benchmarks have published results for both models. o1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct has 25.