# o3-mini vs Qwen3.5-Flash

> Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/o3-mini-vs-qwen3-5-flash
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 28

## Summary

- They share 28 benchmarks with published results for both. o3-mini scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3.5-Flash in 6 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.5-Flash leads 33.7 to 16.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 68.8% for o3-mini and 82.9% for Qwen3.5-Flash.
- Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $1.10 / $4.40 for o3-mini.
- Qwen3.5-Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 200K.

## Snapshot

| | o3-mini | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 36.7 | 42.5 |
| Rank | 212 | 112 |
| Context | 200K | 1M |
| Input $/M | $1.10 | $0.10 |
| Output $/M | $4.40 | $0.40 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- o3-mini: 40.8 (#132)
- Qwen3.5-Flash: 34.2 (#242)

| Benchmark | o3-mini | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1378 | 1412 |
| Aider Polyglot | 60.4% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1244 |
| SciCode | 39.8% | — |
| GSO | 1.3% | — |
| WeirdML | 43.7% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 82.7% | — |
| CadEval | 54% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 221.8 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- o3-mini: 29.6 (#84)
- Qwen3.5-Flash: —

| Benchmark | o3-mini | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | 22.5% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 462.69 |

## Reasoning

- o3-mini: 16.3 (#305)
- Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.7 (#72)

| Benchmark | o3-mini | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 17% | 21% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1366 | 1403 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 7% | 20% |
| DTBench | 68.8% | 82.9% |
| LMCA | 19% | 29.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 140.34 | 143.98 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 3% | — |
| SimpleBench | 22.8% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 34.5% | — |
| CritPt | 0.3% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 89.6% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 70.6% | — |
| ForecastBench | 59.6 | — |
| LiveBench | 75.9% | — |

## Math

- o3-mini: 28.1 (#244)
- Qwen3.5-Flash: 37.4 (#158)

| Benchmark | o3-mini | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 18.6% | 18.2% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 76.9% | 84.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1396 | 1407 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 12.4% | 6.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | 0% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 0% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 77.3% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 96.5% | — |

## Knowledge

- o3-mini: 38.3 (#146)
- Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#93)

| Benchmark | o3-mini | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 77% | 82.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 15.3% | 20.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1364 | 1407 |
| Confabulations | 17.9% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 10.5% |

## Multilingual

- o3-mini: 45.7 (#164)
- Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.5 (#121)

| Benchmark | o3-mini | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1319 | 1385 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1379 | 1446 |
| LMArena French | 1334 | 1412 |
| LMArena German | 1303 | 1390 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1286 | 1368 |
| LMArena Korean | 1314 | 1344 |
| LMArena Russian | 1304 | 1379 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1321 | 1400 |

## Instruction Following

- o3-mini: 75.1 (#72)
- Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.6 (#139)

| Benchmark | o3-mini | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1337 | 1374 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 84.4% | — |

## Long Context

- o3-mini: 33.8 (#256)
- Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#124)

| Benchmark | o3-mini | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1343 | 1392 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 50% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- o3-mini: 50.3 (#182)
- Qwen3.5-Flash: 57.9 (#122)

| Benchmark | o3-mini | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1337 | 1397 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1286 | 1343 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1320 | 1393 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 61.7% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 50.7% | — |

## FAQ

### Is o3-mini better than Qwen3.5-Flash?

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, o3-mini or Qwen3.5-Flash?

Qwen3.5-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; o3-mini lists at $1.10 and $4.40.

### Is o3-mini or Qwen3.5-Flash better for coding?

o3-mini scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.8 versus 34.2 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5-Flash does, with 1M tokens against 200K.

### How many benchmarks do o3-mini and Qwen3.5-Flash share?

28 benchmarks have published results for both models. o3-mini has 51 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-Flash has 32.