Model comparison
o3-mini vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
Head-to-head evidence from 8 shared benchmark results across 4 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: o3-mini #136 (Supported); Qwen3.5-122B-A10B #47 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. o3-mini and Qwen3.5-122B-A10B share 8 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 2 results are unique to o3-mini; 23 to Qwen3.5-122B-A10B.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 8
- o3-mini only
- 2
- Qwen3.5-122B-A10B only
- 23
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Pick Qwen3.5-122B-A10B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. o3-mini only becomes the better choice if instruction following is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 8 shared benchmark results across 4 evidence categories; 3 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 60.56 to 47.41. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 72 against 49.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 49.3% to 72%. o3-mini does hit back in instruction following, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
o3-mini is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.10 input / $4.40 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Qwen3.5-122B-A10B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Qwen3.5-122B-A10B gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 200K for o3-mini.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | o3-mini | Δ | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | o3-mini49.3 | Margin→ 22.7 | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B72.0 |
| Knowledge | o3-mini77.2 | Margin→ 6.4 | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B83.6 |
| Inst. Following | o3-mini93.9 | Margin← 0.5 | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B93.4 |
| Agentic | o3-miniNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B56.4 |
| Reasoning | o3-miniNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B60.2 |
| Multilingual | o3-miniNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B82.2 |
| Multimodal | o3-miniNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B77.2 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 49.3%B 72%Winner: Qwen3.5-122B-A10BΔ 22.7SWE-bench Verified: o3-mini scored 49.3%; Qwen3.5-122B-A10B scored 72%. Qwen3.5-122B-A10B wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 77.2%B 86.6%Winner: Qwen3.5-122B-A10BΔ 9.4GPQA: o3-mini scored 77.2%; Qwen3.5-122B-A10B scored 86.6%. Qwen3.5-122B-A10B wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
IFEval
Inst. FollowingA 93.9%B 93.4%Winner: o3-miniΔ 0.5IFEval: o3-mini scored 93.9%; Qwen3.5-122B-A10B scored 93.4%. o3-mini wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | o3-mini | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | o3-mini$1.1 input / $4.4 output | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B$0 input / $0 output | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | o3-mini160 tok/s | Qwen3.5-122B-A10BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | o3-mini7.12 s | Qwen3.5-122B-A10BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | o3-mini200K | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B262K | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | o3-mini | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 28.7% | 93.6% | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 49.4% | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 63.8% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 58% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 20.7% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 23.9% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 978 | Not comparable |
CodingQwen3.5-122B-A10B wins3 benchmarks
Reasoning3 benchmarks
KnowledgeQwen3.5-122B-A10B wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | o3-mini | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLUSource | 86.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | 77.2% | 86.6% | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 19.0% | 32.3% | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 74.8% | 85.7% | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B leads |
| AA-HLESource | 8.7% | 23.4% | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 86.7% | Not comparable |
| SuperGPQASource | — | 67.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | -39.6% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 24.7% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 85.5% | Not comparable |
Math1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | o3-mini | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME 2024Source | 87.3% | — | Not comparable |
Multilingual1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | o3-mini | Qwen3.5-122B-A10B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProXSource | — | 82.2% | Not comparable |
Multimodal6 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, o3-mini or Qwen3.5-122B-A10B?
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 60.56 to 47.41. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 49.3% and 72%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, o3-mini or Qwen3.5-122B-A10B?
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 83.6 versus 77.2. Inside this category, AA-HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, o3-mini or Qwen3.5-122B-A10B?
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 72 versus 49.3. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for instruction following, o3-mini or Qwen3.5-122B-A10B?
o3-mini has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 93.9 versus 93.4. Inside this category, IFEval is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.