Model comparison
o3-pro vs Qwen3.8 Max
Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 42.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. o3-pro scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3.8 Max in 3 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.8 Max leads 61.7 to 29.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is LMCA: 38.5% for o3-pro and 46.2% for Qwen3.8 Max.
- Qwen3.8 Max is cheaper at $2 / $6 per million input/output tokens, against $20 / $80 for o3-pro.
- Qwen3.8 Max accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 200K.
Side by side
| o3-pro | Qwen3.8 Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 42.9 | 56.8 |
| Released | 2025-06-10 | 2026-08-02 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 200K | 1M |
| Max output | 100K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $20 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $80 | $6 |
| Results tracked | 12 | 39 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding o3-pro leads
o3-pro: 55.5 (#24), Qwen3.8 Max: 53.5 (#29)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| DeepSWE | — | 57.5% |
| Aider Polyglot | 84.9% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1674 |
| FrontierSWE | — | 17.8% |
| SciCode | — | 53.2% |
| WeirdML | 58.2% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1502 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
o3-pro: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 45.4 (#14)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 63.3% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 55.1% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 23.2% |
Reasoning Qwen3.8 Max leads
o3-pro: 23.8 (#171), Qwen3.8 Max: 54.4 (#26)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 86.9% | 92% |
| LMCA | 38.5% | 46.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 147.42 | 156.41 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 4.9% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 72.1% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 88.3% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 59.3% | — |
| CritPt | — | 20% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 40% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1496 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 38% |
Math Not comparable
o3-pro: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 73.2 (#20)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 74.7% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 46.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 100% |
| ProofBench | — | 58% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1499 |
Knowledge Qwen3.8 Max leads
o3-pro: 29.5 (#238), Qwen3.8 Max: 61.7 (#27)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 92.7% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 47.3% |
| Confabulations | 14.2% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 23.3% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1507 |
Multimodal Not comparable
o3-pro: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 37.2 (#75)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1314 |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 20% |
Multilingual Not comparable
o3-pro: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 56.7 (#18)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1472 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1538 |
| LMArena French | — | 1503 |
| LMArena German | — | 1483 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1467 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1461 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1481 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1492 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
o3-pro: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 77.6 (#17)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1479 |
Long Context o3-pro leads
o3-pro: 72.2 (#1), Qwen3.8 Max: 45.6 (#31)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 97.2% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1489 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.8 Max leads
o3-pro: 57.1 (#133), Qwen3.8 Max: 67.1 (#30)
| Benchmark | o3-pro | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1483 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1479 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 84.4% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1489 |
Frequently asked questions
Is o3-pro better than Qwen3.8 Max?
Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 42.9 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, o3-pro or Qwen3.8 Max?
Qwen3.8 Max is cheaper. It lists at $2 per million input tokens and $6 per million output tokens; o3-pro lists at $20 and $80.
Is o3-pro or Qwen3.8 Max better for coding?
o3-pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 53.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.8 Max does, with 1M tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do o3-pro and Qwen3.8 Max share?
3 benchmarks have published results for both models. o3-pro has 12 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 Max has 39.