ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

o3 vs Qwen3 235B-A22B vs Gemini 2.5 Pro

Gemini 2.5 Pro comes out ahead, 63 to 58 and 51 on our weighted score, though Qwen3 235B-A22B is 2.8× cheaper per token.

  1. OpenAI

    o3

    Released Apr 16, 2025

    58/100
    • ECI146.9
    • Price$2.00 / $8.00
    • Context200K
  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 235B-A22B

    Released Apr 28, 2025

    51/100
    • ECI139.4
    • Price$0.70 / $2.80
    • Context131K
  3. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 2.5 Pro

    Released Jun 17, 2025

    63/100
    • ECI145.3
    • Price$1.25 / $10.00
    • Context1.05M
01 — Verdict

Gemini 2.5 Pro is our pick

Gemini 2.5 Pro is the better all-round choice, scoring 63/100 against o3 (58) and Qwen3 235B-A22B (51). It leads on inputs & features and context window. o3 wins on capability. Qwen3 235B-A22B wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • Capabilityo3Capabilities Index (ECI): o3 146.9 · Gemini 2.5 Pro 145.3 · Qwen3 235B-A22B 139.4
  • Lowest priceQwen3 235B-A22BQwen3 235B-A22B $1.23 · Gemini 2.5 Pro $3.44 · o3 $3.50 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGemini 2.5 ProGemini 2.5 Pro 1,048,576 · o3 200,000 · Qwen3 235B-A22B 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 2.5 Proo3: Text, Images, PDFs · Qwen3 235B-A22B: Text · Gemini 2.5 Pro: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingQwen3 235B-A22BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeighto3Qwen3 235B-A22BGemini 2.5 Pro
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%746572
Price25%244624
Inputs & features15%8035100
Context window10%322461
Overall100%58/10051/10063/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

o3 vs Qwen3 235B-A22B vs Gemini 2.5 Pro specifications side by side
Specificationo3OpenAIQwen3 235B-A22BAlibaba (Qwen)Gemini 2.5 ProGoogle
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)146.9 (best)139.4145.3
ECI rank#63 of 148 (best)#103 of 148#78 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions81.8%70.7%85.3% (best)
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics33.3% (best)—24.6%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics84.4%—84.7% (best)
SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues62.3% (best)—57.6%
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions49.4%——
Price per million tokens
Input$2.00$0.70 (best)$1.25
Output$8.00$2.80 (best)$10.00
Cached input$0.50—$0.125 (best)
Blended (3:1)$3.50$1.23 (best)$3.44
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateOver 200K: $2.50 / $15.00
Price sourceOfficial OpenAI APIOfficial Alibaba APIOfficial Google API
Limits
Context window200,000 tokens131,072 tokens1,048,576 tokens (best)
Max output100,000 tokens (best)16,384 tokens65,536 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesNoYes
PDFsYesNoYes
AudioNoNoYes
VideoNoNoYes
ReasoningYeslow · medium · highYesYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputYesNoYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpenProprietary
API model IDo3qwen3-235b-a22bgemini-2.5-pro
API providers18722 (best)
ReleasedApr 16, 2025Apr 28, 2025Jun 17, 2025
Knowledge cutoffMay 2024Apr 2025Jan 2025
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • o3$36.00
  • Qwen3 235B-A22B$12.60
  • Gemini 2.5 Pro$32.50
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: o3, Qwen3 235B-A22B or Gemini 2.5 Pro?

Gemini 2.5 Pro is the better all-round choice, scoring 63/100 against o3 (58) and Qwen3 235B-A22B (51). It leads on inputs & features and context window. o3 wins on capability. Qwen3 235B-A22B wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, o3, Qwen3 235B-A22B or Gemini 2.5 Pro?

Qwen3 235B-A22B is cheaper at $0.70 input / $2.80 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Gemini 2.5 Pro costs $1.25 input / $10.00 output per million tokens (official Google API price); o3 costs $2.00 input / $8.00 output per million tokens (official OpenAI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.23 per million tokens for Qwen3 235B-A22B versus $3.44 for Gemini 2.5 Pro (2.8× as much) and $3.50 for o3 (2.9× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

o3 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): o3 146.9 (#63 of 148), Gemini 2.5 Pro 145.3 (#78 of 148) and Qwen3 235B-A22B 139.4 (#103 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (144.9–148.6 vs 143.6–146.9), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Gemini 2.5 Pro 85.3%, o3 81.8%, Qwen3 235B-A22B 70.7%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3 235B-A22B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, o3 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.5 Pro has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 200,000 for o3 and 131,072 for Qwen3 235B-A22B. Maximum output per response: o3 up to 100,000, Qwen3 235B-A22B up to 16,384, Gemini 2.5 Pro up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

o3 accepts text, images and PDFs; Qwen3 235B-A22B accepts text; Gemini 2.5 Pro accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video. Gemini 2.5 Pro handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Qwen3 235B-A22B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; o3 and Gemini 2.5 Pro is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Gemini 2.5 Pro is the newest, released Jun 17, 2025. Qwen3 235B-A22B came out Apr 28, 2025; o3 came out Apr 16, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: o3 May 2024, Qwen3 235B-A22B Apr 2025, Gemini 2.5 Pro Jan 2025.

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 Oct 4, 2026.