o3-deep-research vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct comes out ahead, 62 to 24 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
OpenAIo3-deep-research
24/100- ECI—
- Price$9.00 / $36.00
- Context200K
- Our pick
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
62/100- ECI118.5
- Price$0.05 / $0.10
- Context131K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is our pick
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 62/100 against o3-deep-research (24). It leads on price. o3-deep-research wins on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceQwen2.5 7B InstructQwen2.5 7B Instruct $0.063 · o3-deep-research $15.75 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contexto3-deep-researcho3-deep-research 200,000 · Qwen2.5 7B Instruct 131,072 tokens
- Widest inputso3-deep-researcho3-deep-research: Text, Images · Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: Text
- Self-hostingQwen2.5 7B InstructPublishes downloadable weights (Apache 2.0)
| Measure | Weight | o3-deep-research | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 0 | 100 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 60 | 25 |
| Context window | 20% | 32 | 25 |
| Overall | 100% | 24/100 | 62/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | o3-deep-researchOpenAI | Qwen2.5 7B InstructAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | 118.5 |
| ECI rank | — | #159 of 165 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | — | 35.5% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | — | 2.5% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $9.00 | $0.05 (best) |
| Output | $36.00 | $0.10 (best) |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $15.75 | $0.063 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 1 providers | Median of 3 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 200,000 tokens (best) | 131,072 tokens |
| Max output | 100,000 tokens (best) | 8,192 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | OpenApache 2.0 |
| API model ID | — | — |
| API providers | 1 | 4 (best) |
| Released | Jun 26, 2025 | Sep 19, 2024 |
| Knowledge cutoff | May 2024 | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- o3-deep-research$162.00
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct$0.70
Which should you choose?
Which is better: o3-deep-research or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 62/100 against o3-deep-research (24). It leads on price. o3-deep-research wins on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, o3-deep-research or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper at $0.05 input / $0.10 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers). o3-deep-research costs $9.00 input / $36.00 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.063 per million tokens for Qwen2.5 7B Instruct versus $15.75 for o3-deep-research (252× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. o3-deep-research has not been scored yet and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has an ECI of 118.5.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for o3-deep-research and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
o3-deep-research has the largest context window at 200,000 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen2.5 7B Instruct. Maximum output per response: o3-deep-research up to 100,000, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct up to 8,192 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
o3-deep-research accepts text and images; Qwen2.5 7B Instruct accepts text. o3-deep-research handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct publishes its weights (Apache 2.0) and can be self-hosted; o3-deep-research is proprietary.
Which is newer?
o3-deep-research is the newest, released Jun 26, 2025. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct came out Sep 19, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: o3-deep-research May 2024.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Gemma 3n E2B ITThree-way comparison
- o3-deep-research vs Gemma 3n E2B ITGoogle
- o3-deep-research vs Devstral MediumMistral AI
- o3-deep-research vs Mistral NemotronNVIDIA
- o3-deep-research vs Sarvam-MSarvam AI
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct vs Llama-3.1-8B-InstructMeta · ECI 116.4
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct vs Mistral NemoMistral AI · ECI 118.6
