o3 vs Qwen3 32B
Updated October 21, 2026. 41 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
Decision reading
Pick o3 for coding: it scores 70.7 on the Vibe Coding Index against 40.0 for Qwen3 32B.
Pick Qwen3 32B when output tokens cost 28.6x less.
- Shared results
- 41
- o3 only
- 56
- Qwen3 32B only
- 1
- Like-for-like categories
- 7 of 9
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.
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, four public coding benchmarks
o3
o3 scores 70.7 against 40.0.
2 and 1 benchmarks behind the scores
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
o3
o3 leads, 20.2 against 7.3.
Same board, both measured
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only o3 has a GPQA Diamond result, 84.1%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only o3 has a AIME result, 85.3%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only o3 has a MMLU Pro result, 85.6%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only o3 has a Design Arena: websites result, 1036.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
o3
o3 takes 200K tokens against 131K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3 32B
o3 $0.0060, Qwen3 32B $0.0002 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only o3 has the number, $0.571.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- o3 70.7 from 2 benchmarks, Qwen3 32B 40.0 from 1 benchmark.
- Widest category
- Agentic work, 50.9 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): o3 74.7% against Qwen3 32B 0.0%, 74.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- o3 $8.00 against Qwen3 32B $0.28 per million output tokens, 28.6x apart.
- Context window
- o3 takes 200K tokens, Qwen3 32B 131K.
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 | o3 | Bars | Qwen3 32B | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 5 | 0 | ||
| Intelligence | 2 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 1 | 0 | ||
| Reasoning | 6 | 0 | ||
| Math | 5 | 0 | ||
| Knowledge | 5 | 0 | ||
| General | 17 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 41 | 0 |
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index50
| Benchmark | o3 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aider polyglot | 81.3% | 40.0% | o3 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 58.4% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| SWE-bench Multimodal | 36.0% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 83.9% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 80.8% | 54.6% | o3 |
| SciCode | Not measured | 36.0% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 37.1% | 3.0% | o3 |
| GSO-Bench | 8.8% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| WeirdML | 52.4% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| ALE-Bench | 933.5 | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1407 | 1357 | o3 |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1415 | 1366 | o3 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | o3 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 20.2 | 7.3 | o3 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 146.7 | 138.4 | o3 |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | o3 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 80.7% | 29.8% | o3 |
| METR time horizons | 65.4% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| GDPval | 30.8% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| DeepResearch Bench | 45.2% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| OSWorld | 23.0% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
| Benchmark | o3 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 84.1% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| MMMU Pro (Vals AI) | 80.4% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 82.7% | 66.8% | o3 |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 20.1% | 7.4% | o3 |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 81.8% | 65.7% | o3 |
| ARC-AGI | 60.8% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 6.5% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| SimpleBench | 53.1% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| Chess puzzles | 37.0% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | 29.0% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| VPCT | 52.0% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1402 | 1334 | o3 |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1402 | 1362 | o3 |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1411 | 1350 | o3 |
| LMArena Vision: diagrams | 1220 | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| LMArena Vision: homework | 1234 | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
| Benchmark | o3 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | 85.3% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| MATH 500 (Vals AI) | 94.6% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| MGSM (Vals AI) | 91.8% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| AA Math Index | 88.3 | 73.0 | o3 |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 88.3% | 73.0% | o3 |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 84.4% | 66.9% | o3 |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 33.3% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| MATH level 5 | 97.8% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1426 | 1399 | o3 |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1423 | 1420 | o3 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
| Benchmark | o3 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | 85.6% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 83.8% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 59.7% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 74.6% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | 65.7% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | 96.1% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | 47.3% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 85.3% | 79.8% | o3 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 49.4% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| GeoBench | 74.0% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1429 | 1372 | o3 |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1448 | 1368 | o3 |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1428 | 1324 | o3 |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1393 | 1318 | o3 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | o3 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1036 | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1016 | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1034 | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1200 | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1021 | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index170
| Benchmark | o3 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAGE (Vals AI) | 41.8% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | 76.7% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| IFBench | 71.4% | 36.3% | o3 |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 74.7% | 0.0% | o3 |
| DTBench | 84.8% | 67.5% | o3 |
| LMCA | 39.7% | 17.3% | o3 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 88.9% | 74.2% | o3 |
| Creative writing (Lech Mazur) | 83.9% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| CL-bench | 17.8% | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| LMArena Text | 1410 | 1340 | o3 |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1368 | 1305 | o3 |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1359 | 1297 | o3 |
| LMArena Vision | 1214 | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1417 | 1359 | o3 |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1401 | 1317 | o3 |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1437 | 1357 | o3 |
| LMArena Text: German | 1420 | 1341 | o3 |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1403 | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1370 | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| LMArena Text: French | 1430 | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1395 | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1406 | 1311 | o3 |
| LMArena Text: Polish | 1438 | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1405 | 1331 | o3 |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1372 | 1327 | o3 |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1372 | 1298 | o3 |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1373 | 1279 | o3 |
| LMArena Vision: English | 1221 | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| LMArena Vision: Chinese | 1237 | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| LMArena Vision: reading text | 1218 | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| LMArena Vision: humor | 1222 | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| LMArena Vision: captioning | 1210 | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| LMArena Vision: recognizing things | 1234 | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| LMArena Vision: creative writing | 1201 | Not measured | Only o3 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | o3 | Qwen3 32B | 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 32B costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3 32B costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3 32B 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 o3 | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | April 16, 2025 | April 28, 2025 |
| Context window | 200K | 131K |
| Input $/Mtok | $2.00 | $0.08 |
| Output $/Mtok | $8.00 | $0.28 |
| Coding index | 70.7 | 40.0 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 2 | 1 |
| Cost per solved task | $0.571 | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is o3 better than Qwen3 32B for coding?
Pick o3 for coding: it scores 70.7 on the Vibe Coding Index against 40.0 for Qwen3 32B. Pick Qwen3 32B when output tokens cost 28.6x less.
Which is cheaper, o3 or Qwen3 32B?
o3 costs $2.00 per million input tokens and $8.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3 32B costs $0.08 and $0.28. Cost per solved task is known for o3 only.
Which has the bigger context window, o3 or Qwen3 32B?
o3, with 200K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks is the o3 vs Qwen3 32B comparison based on?
41 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. o3's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Qwen3 32B's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.