o1 vs Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 costs 33.3x less per output token than o1 ($1.80 vs $60.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 14 benchmarks have a result for both.
o1 or Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20: which to pick
Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 has a coding score, 39.5 on the Vibe Coding Index; o1 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick o1 for work measured by MMMU Pro (Vals AI) or Chess puzzles, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 14
- o1 only
- 55
- Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 only
- 11
- Like-for-like categories
- 6 of 9
Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only o1 has a AA Intelligence Index result, 15.2.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 leads, 87.4% against 73.2%.
Same board, both measured
Math
AIME
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 leads, 86.0% against 71.5%.
Same board, both measured
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 leads, 87.2% against 83.5%.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 takes 1M tokens against 200K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20
o1 $0.045, Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 $0.0012 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 has the number, $1.35.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- o1 not benchmarked, Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 39.5 from 2 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Coding, 35.1 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- MMMU Pro (Vals AI): o1 77.4% against Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 22.8%, 54.6 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- o1 $60.00 against Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 $1.80 per million output tokens, 33.3x apart.
- Context window
- o1 takes 200K tokens, Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 1M.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | o1 | Bars | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 1 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 2 | 2 | ||
| Math | 0 | 2 | ||
| Knowledge | 2 | 2 | ||
| General | 0 | 2 | ||
| All shared boards | 4 | 10 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index01
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aider polyglot | 61.7% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| AA Coding Index | 39.7 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 50.3% | 85.3% | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | Not measured | 71.2% | Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 15.7% | Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 67.9% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 12.9% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| WeirdML | 46.1% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| ALE-Bench | Not measured | 608.9 | Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1367 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1366 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| SciCode | 4.6% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 15.2 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 141.7 | 146.2 | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 62.6% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| METR time horizons | 51.1% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| Vending-Bench 2 | Not measured | $1 | Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index22
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 73.2% | 87.4% | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 |
| MMMU Pro (Vals AI) | 77.4% | 22.8% | o1 |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 74.7% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 7.0% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 76.8% | 84.8% | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 |
| ARC-AGI | 30.7% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| SimpleBench | 40.1% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| Chess puzzles | 10.0% | 8.0% | o1 |
| Mystery game puzzles | Not measured | 17.0% | Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 measured |
| VPCT | 37.0% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1371 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1361 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1372 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | 71.5% | 86.0% | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 |
| MATH 500 (Vals AI) | 90.4% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| MGSM (Vals AI) | 89.3% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 73.3% | 86.7% | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 14.7% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| MATH level 5 | 94.7% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1388 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1390 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index22
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | 83.5% | 87.2% | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 80.4% | 85.1% | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 |
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | Not measured | 59.7% | Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | Not measured | 65.3% | Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 74.3% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | Not measured | 60.8% | Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 measured |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | 96.5% | 95.2% | o1 |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 84.1% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| SimpleQA Verified | 41.1% | 25.4% | o1 |
| GeoBench | 80.0% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1369 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1355 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1368 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1328 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAGE (Vals AI) | Not measured | 30.4% | Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 measured |
| IFBench | 70.3% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 65.0% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| DTBench | 74.7% | 80.5% | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 |
| LMCA | 22.3% | 36.4% | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 83.3% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| Creative writing (Lech Mazur) | 70.2% | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| CL-bench | Not measured | 19.8% | Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 measured |
| CL-bench Life | Not measured | 12.4% | Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 measured |
| LMArena Text | 1366 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1367 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1347 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Vision | 1168 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1372 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1358 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1394 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: German | 1337 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1346 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1396 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: French | 1344 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1345 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1356 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1355 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1378 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1360 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1358 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Vision: English | 1162 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| LMArena Vision: Chinese | 1235 | Not measured | Only o1 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | o1 | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | OpenAI o1 | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | No public weights listed |
| Released | December 17, 2024 | April 27, 2026 |
| Context window | 200K | 1M |
| Input $/Mtok | $15.00 | $0.30 |
| Output $/Mtok | $60.00 | $1.80 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 39.5 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 2 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | $1.35 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is o1 better than Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 for coding?
Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 has a coding score, 39.5 on the Vibe Coding Index; o1 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick o1 for work measured by MMMU Pro (Vals AI) or Chess puzzles, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, o1 or Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20?
o1 costs $15.00 per million input tokens and $60.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 costs $0.30 and $1.80. Cost per solved task is known for Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 only.
Which has the bigger context window, o1 or Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20?
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20, with 1M tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks is the o1 vs Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 comparison based on?
14 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. o1's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.