o3 vs Qwen3 6
o3 
Qwen3 6 Verdict
- Qwen3 6 (max) leads on quality: 63.3 vs 61.6.
- o3 is stronger in coding, maths, multimodal.
- Qwen3 6 (max) is stronger in agents & tools, composite, human preference, instruction following, knowledge, long context, reasoning.
- Qwen3 6 (max) is 1.2× cheaper ($2.96 vs $3.50 per 1M blended).
- o3 streams 1.8× faster (107 vs 60 tokens per second).
| Metric | o3 | Qwen3 6 (max) |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 61.6 | 63.3 |
| Agents & tools score | 70.3 | 72.0 |
| Coding score | 62.0 | 58.1 |
| Composite score | 54.5 | 64.9 |
| Human preference score | 62.3 | 65.8 |
| Instruction following score | 65.0 | 74.2 |
| Knowledge score | 58.0 | 64.0 |
| Long context score | 63.8 | 66.9 |
| Maths score | 78.6 | 64.2 |
| Multimodal score | 57.9 | – |
| Reasoning score | 61.5 | 63.1 |
| Blended price $/M | $3.50 | $2.96 |
| Output speed | 107 tok/s | 60 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 6.3 s | 36.6 s |
| Context window | 200k | 246k |
| GPQA Diamond | – | 87.4% |
| OTIS Mock AIME | – | 91.1% |
| SWE-bench Verified (Epoch) | – | 76.7% |
| SimpleQA Verified | – | 52.0% |
| SimpleBench | – | 63.0% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 146.9 | 149.3 |
| LMArena Text | 1432 | 1460 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1441 | 1481 |
| LMArena Coding | 1460 | 1509 |
| LMArena WebDev | – | 1479 |
| LMArena Vision | 1214 | – |
| AA Intelligence Index | 20.2 | 28.4 |
| IFBench | 71.4% | 76.6% |
| AA-LCR | 74.7% | 80.7% |
| MMMU-Pro | 70.1% | – |
| AA-Omniscience | -15.6 | 9.2 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | 37.1% | 43.9% |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 82.7% | 88.8% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 20.1% | 30.8% |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | 80.7% | 95.9% |
| CorpFin | – | 66.5% |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | – | 72.8% |
| PRBench Finance | 47.7% | – |
| PRBench Legal | 48.6% | – |
| MMMU (validation) | 82.9% | – |
| MMMU-Pro (official) | 76.4% | – |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 67.6% | – |
| IFEval (HELM) | 86.9% | – |
| Omni-MATH (HELM) | 71.4% | – |
| WildBench (HELM) | 86.1% | – |
| MMLU-Pro (HELM) | 85.9% | – |
| GPQA Diamond (HELM) | 75.3% | – |
| HELM Capabilities mean | 81.1% | – |
| Aider Polyglot | 81.3% | – |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 58.4% | – |
| SWE-bench Verified (any scaffold) | 58.4% | – |
| BFCL Overall | 63.0% | – |
Data as of 2026-09-12. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
o3 vs Qwen3 6: questions
- Is o3 better than Qwen3 6?
- Qwen3 6 (max) leads on quality: 63.3 vs 61.6. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Qwen3 6 (max) is ahead overall as of 2026-09-12, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is o3 better than Qwen3 6 for coding?
- o3 scores higher in coding (62 vs 58 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is o3 better than Qwen3 6 for agentic tasks?
- Qwen3 6 scores higher in agentic tasks (72 vs 70 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, o3 or Qwen3 6?
- Qwen3 6 is cheaper: $2.96 against $3.50 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, o3 or Qwen3 6?
- o3 streams faster: 107 against 60 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Qwen3 6 accepts more context: 246k against 200k tokens.