Model comparison
o3-pro vs Qwen3.5 27B
o3-pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 41.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5 27B costs 42× less per token, which makes it the better buy when o3-pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. o3-pro scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3.5 27B in 3 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where o3-pro leads 72.2 to 43.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is WeirdML: 58.2% for o3-pro and 39.5% for Qwen3.5 27B.
- Qwen3.5 27B is cheaper at $0.30 / $2.40 per million input/output tokens, against $20 / $80 for o3-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
| o3-pro | Qwen3.5 27B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 42.9 | 41.9 |
| Released | 2025-06-10 | 2026-02-23 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 200K | 262K |
| Max output | 100K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $20 | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $80 | $2.40 |
| Results tracked | 12 | 28 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding o3-pro leads
o3-pro: 55.5 (#24), Qwen3.5 27B: 38.9 (#168)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 58.2% | 39.5% |
| Aider Polyglot | 84.9% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1358 |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1427 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 349.45 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
o3-pro: —, Qwen3.5 27B: —
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 201.98 |
Reasoning Qwen3.5 27B leads
o3-pro: 23.8 (#171), Qwen3.5 27B: 27.5 (#117)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 86.9% | 82.4% |
| LMCA | 38.5% | 34% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 4.9% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 72.1% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 47.9% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 59.3% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 45.5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1414 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 147.42 | — |
Math Not comparable
o3-pro: —, Qwen3.5 27B: 38.8 (#127)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 56.7% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1429 |
Knowledge Qwen3.5 27B leads
o3-pro: 29.5 (#238), Qwen3.5 27B: 38.0 (#150)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 23.3% | 12.1% |
| Confabulations | 14.2% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1428 |
Multimodal Not comparable
o3-pro: —, Qwen3.5 27B: 39.4 (#59)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1241 |
Multilingual Not comparable
o3-pro: —, Qwen3.5 27B: 50.8 (#115)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.5 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
o3-pro: —, Qwen3.5 27B: 73.5 (#119)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1393 |
Long Context o3-pro leads
o3-pro: 72.2 (#1), Qwen3.5 27B: 43.1 (#106)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 97.2% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1413 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.5 27B leads
o3-pro: 57.1 (#133), Qwen3.5 27B: 59.3 (#111)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1409 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1362 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 84.4% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1410 |
Frequently asked questions
Is o3-pro better than Qwen3.5 27B?
o3-pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 41.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5 27B costs 42× less per token, which makes it the better buy when o3-pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, o3-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; o3-pro lists at $20 and $80.
Is o3-pro or Qwen3.5 27B better for coding?
o3-pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 38.9 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.5 27B does, with 262K tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do o3-pro and Qwen3.5 27B share?
4 benchmarks have published results for both models. o3-pro has 12 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 27B has 28.