Model comparison
o3-pro vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
o3-pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.7 to 32.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5-Coder-32B costs 47× less per token, which makes it the better buy when o3-pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. o3-pro scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B in 1 category; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where o3-pro leads 72.1 to 37.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Aider Polyglot: 84.9% for o3-pro and 16.4% for Qwen2.5-Coder-32B.
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is cheaper at $0.66 / $1 per million input/output tokens, against $20 / $80 for o3-pro.
- o3-pro accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 33K.
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| o3-pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 42.7 | 32.9 |
| Released | 2025-06-10 | 2024-09-18 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 200K | 33K |
| Max output | 100K | 29K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $20 | $0.66 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $80 | $1 |
| Results tracked | 12 | 31 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding o3-pro leads
o3-pro: 55.1 (#22), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.4 (#328)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 84.9% | 16.4% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 9% |
| WeirdML | 58.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 49% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 56.9% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1276 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 58% |
| HumanEval+ | — | 87.2% |
| MBPP+ | — | 77% |
Reasoning o3-pro leads
o3-pro: 24.1 (#152), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 20.4 (#220)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 147.43 | 119.41 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 4.9% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 72.1% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 59.3% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 42.1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1251 |
| DTBench | 86.9% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 49.9% |
| LMCA | 38.5% | — |
| HellaSwag | — | 83% |
| LiveBench | — | 46.2% |
| WinoGrande | — | 80.8% |
Math Not comparable
o3-pro: —, Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 30.8 (#203)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | — | 46.6% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1251 |
| GSM8K | — | 93% |
Knowledge Qwen2.5-Coder-32B leads
o3-pro: 29.0 (#234), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 32.9 (#200)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Confabulations | 14.2% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 23.3% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1221 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 70.5% |
| MMLU | — | 79.1% |
Multilingual Not comparable
o3-pro: —, Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#230)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1205 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1222 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1228 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
o3-pro: —, Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.6 (#240)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 58.7% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1223 |
Long Context o3-pro leads
o3-pro: 72.1 (#1), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.9 (#204)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 97.2% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1251 |
Writing & Preference o3-pro leads
o3-pro: 57.1 (#128), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.8 (#235)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1230 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1174 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 84.4% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1222 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 23.3% |
Frequently asked questions
Is o3-pro better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?
o3-pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.7 to 32.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5-Coder-32B costs 47× 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 Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is cheaper. It lists at $0.66 per million input tokens and $1 per million output tokens; o3-pro lists at $20 and $80.
Is o3-pro or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?
o3-pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.1 versus 22.4 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
o3-pro does, with 200K tokens against 33K.
How many benchmarks do o3-pro and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. o3-pro has 12 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.