Model Comparison

o3 vs Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Comparing o3 and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct across benchmarks, pricing, and capabilities.

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

No common benchmarks found

o3 and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct don't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct costs less

For input processing, o3 ($2.00/1M tokens) is 22.2x more expensive than Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct ($0.09/1M tokens).

For output processing, o3 ($8.00/1M tokens) is 88.9x more expensive than Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct ($0.09/1M tokens).

In conclusion, o3 is more expensive than Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Wed Apr 15 2026 • llm-stats.com
OpenAI
o3
Input tokens$2.00
Output tokens$8.00
Best providerOpenAI
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct
Input tokens$0.09
Output tokens$0.09
Best providerLambda
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

o3 accepts 200,000 input tokens compared to Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct's 128,000 tokens. Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while o3 is limited to 100,000 tokens.

OpenAI
o3
Input200,000 tokens
Output100,000 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Wed Apr 15 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

o3 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct does not.

o3 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

o3

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

o3 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct uses Apache 2.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

o3

Proprietary

Closed source

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

o3 was released on 2025-04-16, while Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct was released on 2024-09-19.

o3 is 7 months newer than Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct.

o3

Apr 16, 2025

12 months ago

6mo newer
Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Sep 19, 2024

1.6 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

o3 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-05-31, while Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm o3's training data extends to 2024-05-31, but cannot make a direct comparison without Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct's cutoff date.

o3

May 2024

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Provider Availability

o3 is available from OpenAI. Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is available from Lambda, DeepInfra, Hyperbolic, Fireworks.

o3

openai logo
OpenAI
Input Price:Input: $2.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $8.00/1M

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

lambda logo
Lambda
Input Price:Input: $0.09/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.09/1M
deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.18/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.18/1M
hyperbolic logo
Hyperbolic
Input Price:Input: $0.20/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.20/1M
fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $0.89/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.89/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion

Key Takeaways

Larger context window (200,000 tokens)
Supports multimodal inputs
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Has open weights
OpenAIo3
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen TeamQwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
OpenAI
o3
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

FAQ

Common questions about o3 vs Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

o3 (OpenAI) and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct (Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team) each have strengths in different areas. Compare their benchmark scores, pricing, context windows, and capabilities above to determine which fits your needs.
o3 scores COLLIE: 98.4%, AIME 2024: 91.6%, ARC-AGI: 88.0%, MathVista: 86.8%, AIME 2025: 86.4%. Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct scores HumanEval: 92.7%, GSM8k: 91.1%, MBPP: 90.2%, HellaSwag: 83.0%, Winogrande: 80.8%.
Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is 22.2x cheaper for input tokens. o3 costs $2.00/M input and $8.00/M output via openai. Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct costs $0.09/M input and $0.09/M output via lambda.
o3 supports 200K tokens and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct supports 128K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include context window (200K vs 128K), input pricing ($2.00 vs $0.09/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
o3 is developed by OpenAI and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.