o1 vs Qwen 3.5 397B
Side-by-side benchmark comparison across coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing.
Qwen 3.5 397B by Qwen wins on 9 of 16 benchmarks against o1 by OpenAI, which leads on 7. This head-to-head comparison covers coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing metrics from our benchmark data.
Category-by-Category Breakdown
General Intelligence: In general intelligence, o1 scores 1360 on Chatbot Arena ELO compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 1350, while o1 scores 82.0% on MMLU-Pro compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 81.0%.
Coding: In coding, o1 scores 89.0% on HumanEval+ compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 88.0%, while Qwen 3.5 397B scores 76.4% on SWE-bench Verified compared to o1's 48.9%, while o1 scores 55.0% on LiveCodeBench compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 54.0%, while Qwen 3.5 397B scores 48.2 on AA Coding Index compared to o1's 39.7.
Math: In math, o1 scores 94.8% on MATH compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 87.0%, while o1 scores 97.5% on GSM8K compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 95.0%.
Reasoning: In reasoning, o1 scores 77.3% on GPQA Diamond compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 62.0%, while Qwen 3.5 397B scores 45.0% on ARC-AGI compared to o1's 32.0%.
Context: In context, Qwen 3.5 397B scores 262K on Context Length compared to o1's 200K.
Pricing Comparison
o1 costs $15.0/1M input tokens and $60.0/1M output tokens, while Qwen 3.5 397B costs $0.55/1M input and $3.5/1M output. Qwen 3.5 397B is the more affordable option for API usage.
Speed Comparison
o1 generates output at 35 tok/s compared to Qwen 3.5 397B's 45 tok/s, and the time to first token is 1000 ms for o1 versus 600 ms for Qwen 3.5 397B. Qwen 3.5 397B delivers faster throughput.
Verdict
For developers prioritizing general intelligence and math, o1 has the edge. For those who value coding and affordability and speed, Qwen 3.5 397B is the stronger choice.
View Individual Model Pages
o1 vs Qwen 3.5 397B — FAQ
Which is better, o1 or Qwen 3.5 397B?
Qwen 3.5 397B wins on more benchmarks overall (9 vs 7). However, the best choice depends on your specific needs — each model excels in different areas.
How does o1 compare to Qwen 3.5 397B for coding?
Qwen 3.5 397B is better for coding, scoring 76.4% on SWE-bench Verified compared to 48.9%. SWE-bench tests real-world software engineering by resolving actual GitHub issues.
Is o1 cheaper than Qwen 3.5 397B?
Yes, Qwen 3.5 397B is cheaper. o1 costs $15.0/1M input and $60.0/1M output tokens. Qwen 3.5 397B costs $0.55/1M input and $3.5/1M output tokens.
Which is faster, o1 or Qwen 3.5 397B?
Qwen 3.5 397B is faster, generating output at 45 tok/s compared to 35 tok/s. Faster output speed means shorter wait times for API responses.
What benchmarks does the o1 vs Qwen 3.5 397B comparison cover?
This comparison covers 16 benchmarks including Chatbot Arena ELO, MMLU-Pro, HumanEval+, MATH, GPQA Diamond, SWE-bench Verified, Output Speed, LiveCodeBench, and more. Metrics span general intelligence, coding, math, reasoning, speed, and cost categories.