Model Comparison
o1 vs Qwen3 32B
Qwen3 32B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Qwen3 32B is 175.0x cheaper per token.
Performance Benchmarks
Comparative analysis across standard metrics
o1 outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Qwen3 32B is better at 2 benchmarks (AIME 2024, LiveBench).
Qwen3 32B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Arena Performance
Human preference votes
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, o1 ($15.00/1M tokens) is 150.0x more expensive than Qwen3 32B ($0.10/1M tokens).
For output processing, o1 ($60.00/1M tokens) is 200.0x more expensive than Qwen3 32B ($0.30/1M tokens).
In conclusion, o1 is more expensive than Qwen3 32B.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
o1 accepts 200,000 input tokens compared to Qwen3 32B's 128,000 tokens. Qwen3 32B can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while o1 is limited to 100,000 tokens.
License
Usage and distribution terms
o1 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3 32B uses Apache 2.0.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
Proprietary
Closed source
Apache 2.0
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
o1 was released on 2024-12-17, while Qwen3 32B was released on 2025-04-29.
Qwen3 32B is 4 months newer than o1.
Dec 17, 2024
1.3 years ago
Apr 29, 2025
11 months ago
4mo newerKnowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.
Unable to compare the recency of their training data.
Provider Availability
o1 is available from Azure, OpenAI. Qwen3 32B is available from DeepInfra, Novita, Sambanova.
o1
Qwen3 32B
Outputs Comparison
Key Takeaways
o1
View detailsOpenAI
Qwen3 32B
View detailsAlibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Detailed Comparison
FAQ
Common questions about o1 vs Qwen3 32B