Model comparison
o3-pro vs Qwen3.6 Flash
o3-pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.6 Flash costs 83× less per token, which makes it the better buy when o3-pro'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. o3-pro scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Flash in 2 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 Flash leads 42.1 to 29.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 86.9% for o3-pro and 77.1% for Qwen3.6 Flash.
- Qwen3.6 Flash is cheaper at $0.19 / $1.13 per million input/output tokens, against $20 / $80 for o3-pro.
- Qwen3.6 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 200K.
Side by side
| o3-pro | Qwen3.6 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 42.9 | 38.8 |
| Released | 2025-06-10 | 2026-04-27 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 200K | 1M |
| Max output | 100K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $20 | $0.19 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $80 | $1.13 |
| Results tracked | 12 | 13 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
o3-pro: 55.5 (#24), Qwen3.6 Flash: —
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 84.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 58.2% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 326.4 |
Reasoning Qwen3.6 Flash leads
o3-pro: 23.8 (#171), Qwen3.6 Flash: 29.0 (#96)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 86.9% | 77.1% |
| LMCA | 38.5% | 31% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 147.42 | 143.26 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 4.9% | — |
| SimpleBench | — | 35.2% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 72.1% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 59.3% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 20% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 18% |
Math Not comparable
o3-pro: —, Qwen3.6 Flash: 39.0 (#117)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 22.5% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 84.4% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 10.3% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 0% |
Knowledge Qwen3.6 Flash leads
o3-pro: 29.5 (#238), Qwen3.6 Flash: 42.1 (#100)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 83.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 15.9% |
| Confabulations | 14.2% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 23.3% | — |
Long Context Not comparable
o3-pro: 72.2 (#1), Qwen3.6 Flash: —
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 97.2% | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
o3-pro: 57.1 (#133), Qwen3.6 Flash: —
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 84.4% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is o3-pro better than Qwen3.6 Flash?
o3-pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.6 Flash costs 83× 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 Qwen3.6 Flash?
Qwen3.6 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.19 per million input tokens and $1.13 per million output tokens; o3-pro lists at $20 and $80.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.6 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do o3-pro and Qwen3.6 Flash share?
3 benchmarks have published results for both models. o3-pro has 12 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Flash has 13.