Model comparison
o1 vs Qwen3 Coder Next
o1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 34.3 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 Coder Next costs 91× less per token, which makes it the better buy when o1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. o1 scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3 Coder Next in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where o1 leads 46.1 to 36.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is WeirdML: 47.6% for o1 and 34.4% for Qwen3 Coder Next.
- Qwen3 Coder Next is cheaper at $0.12 / $0.80 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $60 for o1.
- Qwen3 Coder Next accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 200K.
- Qwen3 Coder Next has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| o1 | Qwen3 Coder Next | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 40.9 | 34.3 |
| Released | 2024-09-12 | 2026-02-02 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 200K | 262K |
| Max output | 100K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $15 | $0.12 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $60 | $0.80 |
| Results tracked | 52 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding o1 leads
o1: 46.1 (#70), Qwen3 Coder Next: 36.3 (#210)
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 47.6% | 34.4% |
| Aider Polyglot | 61.7% | — |
| SciCode | — | 32.3% |
| LiveBench Coding | 69.7% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1367 | — |
| CadEval | 56% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 89% | — |
| MBPP+ | 80.2% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
o1: 24.6 (#117), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 10% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 51.1% | — |
Reasoning o1 leads
o1: 27.9 (#111), Qwen3 Coder Next: 22.4 (#196)
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 41.7% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 30.7% | — |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| 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 Not comparable
o1: 36.1 (#175), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 14.7% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 73.3% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 80.3% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1388 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 94.7% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 9.3% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
o1: 41.5 (#110), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 76.8% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 8% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 41.1% | — |
| Confabulations | 11.7% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1361 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
o1: 34.2 (#93), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1168 | — |
| GeoBench | 80% | — |
| VPCT | 37% | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 41.4% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
o1: 48.6 (#142), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| 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), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 81.5% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1367 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
o1: 50.3 (#9), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 83.3% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1378 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
o1: 55.6 (#144), Qwen3 Coder Next: —
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3 Coder Next |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Qwen3 Coder Next?
o1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.9 to 34.3 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 Coder Next costs 91× 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 Next?
Qwen3 Coder Next is cheaper. It lists at $0.12 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; o1 lists at $15 and $60.
Is o1 or Qwen3 Coder Next better for coding?
o1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.1 versus 36.3 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3 Coder Next does, with 262K tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do o1 and Qwen3 Coder Next share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. o1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 Coder Next has 3.