Model comparison
o3 vs Qwen3.5 Flash
Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: o3 #131 (Supported); Qwen3.5 Flash #134 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. o3 and Qwen3.5 Flash share 2 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 14 results are unique to o3; 0 to Qwen3.5 Flash.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 2
- o3 only
- 14
- Qwen3.5 Flash only
- 0
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick o3 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.5 Flash only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you need the larger 1M context window.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results across 1 evidence category; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
o3 has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 47.89 versus 47.65. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
o3's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 14.5 against 4.7. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), 18.685% to 6.207%.
o3 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.00 input / $8.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.10 input / $0.40 output per 1M tokens for Qwen3.5 Flash. That is roughly 20.0x on output cost alone. Qwen3.5 Flash gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for o3.
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 | Δ | Qwen3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | o314.5 | Margin← 9.8 | Qwen3.5 Flash4.7 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 18.685%B 6.207%Winner: o3Δ 12.5FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): o3 scored 18.685%; Qwen3.5 Flash scored 6.207%. o3 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
MathA 2.083%B 0.000%Winner: o3Δ 2.1FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): o3 scored 2.083%; Qwen3.5 Flash scored 0.000%. o3 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | o3 | Qwen3.5 Flash | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | o3$2 input / $8 output | Qwen3.5 Flash$0.1 input / $0.4 output | Qwen3.5 Flash has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | o3118 tok/s | Qwen3.5 FlashNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | o35.38 s | Qwen3.5 FlashNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | o3200K | Qwen3.5 Flash1M | Qwen3.5 Flash lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | o3 | Qwen3.5 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 80.7% | — | Not comparable |
Coding1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | o3 | Qwen3.5 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-SciCodeSource | 41.0% | — | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | o3 | Qwen3.5 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 30.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 82.7% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 20.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -15.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 38.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 87.1% | — | Not comparable |
Matho3 wins3 benchmarks
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | o3 | Qwen3.5 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 71.4% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, o3 or Qwen3.5 Flash?
o3 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 47.89 to 47.65. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 18.685% and 6.207%.
Which is better for math, o3 or Qwen3.5 Flash?
o3 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 14.5 versus 4.7. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) 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.