# o3-pro vs Qwen1.5-110B

> o3-pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.7 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/o3-pro-vs-qwen1-5-110b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in long context, where o3-pro leads 72.1 to 35.0.
- Qwen1.5-110B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | o3-pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 42.7 | 33.6 |
| Rank | 94 | 231 |
| Context | 200K | — |
| Input $/M | $20 | — |
| Output $/M | $80 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- o3-pro: 55.1 (#22)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 32.4 (#260)

| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 84.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 58.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 35% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1184 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 44.4% |

## Reasoning

- o3-pro: 24.1 (#152)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 21.7 (#192)

| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 4.9% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 72.1% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 59.3% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1168 |
| DTBench | 86.9% | — |
| LMCA | 38.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 147.43 | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 57.7 |

## Math

- o3-pro: —
- Qwen1.5-110B: 31.1 (#199)

| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1185 |

## Knowledge

- o3-pro: 29.0 (#234)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 30.7 (#217)

| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| Confabulations | 14.2% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 23.3% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1144 |

## Multilingual

- o3-pro: —
- Qwen1.5-110B: 33.8 (#245)

| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1142 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1206 |
| LMArena French | — | 1150 |
| LMArena German | — | 1123 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1074 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1044 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1118 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1141 |

## Instruction Following

- o3-pro: —
- Qwen1.5-110B: 60.6 (#247)

| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1158 |

## Long Context

- o3-pro: 72.1 (#1)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 35.0 (#237)

| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 97.2% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1157 |

## Writing & Preference

- o3-pro: 57.1 (#128)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 38.1 (#250)

| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1175 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1148 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 84.4% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1160 |

## FAQ

### Is o3-pro better than Qwen1.5-110B?

o3-pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.7 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index.

### Is o3-pro or Qwen1.5-110B better for coding?

o3-pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.1 versus 32.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do o3-pro and Qwen1.5-110B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. o3-pro has 12 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-110B has 20.