Model comparison

o3-mini vs Qwen1.5-110B

o3-mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.7 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

o3-mini OpenAI

36.7

Rank #205 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-110B Alibaba (Qwen)

33.6

Rank #231 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. o3-mini scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen1.5-110B in 3 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in instruction following, where o3-mini leads 75.3 to 60.6.
  • Qwen1.5-110B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

o3-mini and Qwen1.5-110B specifications
o3-miniQwen1.5-110B
ProviderOpenAIAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index36.733.6
Released2024-12-202024-04-25
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K—
Max output100K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.10—
Output $ / M tokens$4.40—
Results tracked5120

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding o3-mini leads

o3-mini: 41.4 (#116), Qwen1.5-110B: 32.4 (#260)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmarko3-miniQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Coding13781184
Aider Polyglot60.4%—
SciCode39.8%—
GSO1.3%—
WeirdML43.7%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—35%
LiveBench Coding82.7%—
BigCodeBench Complete—44.4%
CadEval54%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

o3-mini: 29.3 (#79), Qwen1.5-110B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmarko3-miniQwen1.5-110B
Cybench22.5%—

Reasoning Qwen1.5-110B leads

o3-mini: 16.3 (#295), Qwen1.5-110B: 21.7 (#192)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmarko3-miniQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Hard Prompts13661168
ForecastBench59.657.7
ARC-AGI-23%—
SimpleBench22.8%—
ARC-AGI-134.5%—
CritPt0.3%—
Chess Puzzles17%—
LiveBench Reasoning89.6%—
Mystery Game Puzzles7%—
DTBench68.8%—
LiveBench Data Analysis70.6%—
LMCA19%—
Epoch Capabilities Index140.35—
LiveBench75.9%—

Math Qwen1.5-110B leads

o3-mini: 27.6 (#236), Qwen1.5-110B: 31.1 (#199)

Knowledge o3-mini leads

o3-mini: 38.3 (#135), Qwen1.5-110B: 30.7 (#217)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmarko3-miniQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Expert13641144
GPQA Diamond77%—
SimpleQA Verified15.3%—
Confabulations17.9%—

Multilingual o3-mini leads

o3-mini: 45.9 (#159), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.8 (#245)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmarko3-miniQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Non-English13191142
LMArena Chinese13791206
LMArena French13331150
LMArena German13031123
LMArena Japanese12861074
LMArena Korean13141044
LMArena Russian13041118
LMArena Spanish13211141

Instruction Following o3-mini leads

o3-mini: 75.3 (#67), Qwen1.5-110B: 60.6 (#247)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmarko3-miniQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Instruction Following13381158
LiveBench Instruction Following84.4%—

Long Context Qwen1.5-110B leads

o3-mini: 33.8 (#251), Qwen1.5-110B: 35.0 (#237)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmarko3-miniQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Longer Query13431157
Fiction.LiveBench50%—

Writing & Preference o3-mini leads

o3-mini: 50.4 (#177), Qwen1.5-110B: 38.1 (#250)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmarko3-miniQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Text13371175
LMArena Creative Writing12861148
LMArena Multi-Turn13201160
Short-Story Creative Writing61.7%—
LiveBench Language50.7%—

Frequently asked questions

Is o3-mini better than Qwen1.5-110B?

o3-mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.7 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index.

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

o3-mini scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.4 versus 32.4 in the Noometry coding category.

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

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. o3-mini has 51 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-110B has 20.

Related comparisons

Go deeper