ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

o4-mini vs Qwen3.5 397B-A17B

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B comes out ahead, 65 to 59 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. OpenAI

    o4-mini

    Released Apr 16, 2025Deprecated

    59/100
    • ECI145.6
    • Price$1.10 / $4.40
    • Context200K
    Full specs Remove o4-mini
  2. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.5 397B-A17B

    Released Feb 15, 2026

    65/100
    • ECI146.7
    • Price$0.60 / $3.60
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.5 397B-A17B

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is our pick

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against o4-mini (59). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityQwen3.5 397B-A17BCapabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 146.7 · o4-mini 145.6
  • Lowest priceQwen3.5 397B-A17BQwen3.5 397B-A17B $1.35 · o4-mini $1.93 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3.5 397B-A17BQwen3.5 397B-A17B 262,144 · o4-mini 200,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.5 397B-A17Bo4-mini: Text, Images · Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: Text, Images, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingQwen3.5 397B-A17BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeighto4-miniQwen3.5 397B-A17B
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%7374
Price25%3644
Inputs & features15%7090
Context window10%3237
Overall100%59/10065/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

o4-mini vs Qwen3.5 397B-A17B specifications side by side
Specificationo4-miniOpenAIQwen3.5 397B-A17BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)145.6146.7 (best)
ECI rank#76 of 148#67 of 148 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions79.6%86.4% (best)
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics36.1% (best)31.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics81.7%88.9% (best)
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions19.6%—
Price per million tokens
Input$1.10$0.60 (best)
Output$4.40$3.60 (best)
Cached input$0.275—
Blended (3:1)$1.93$1.35 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial OpenAI APIOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window200,000 tokens262,144 tokens (best)
Max output100,000 tokens (best)65,536 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoYes
VideoNoYes
ReasoningYeslow · medium · highYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpen
API model IDo4-miniqwen3.5-397b-a17b
API providers1923 (best)
ReleasedApr 16, 2025Feb 15, 2026
Knowledge cutoffMay 2024—
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.

  • o4-mini$19.80
  • Qwen3.5 397B-A17B$13.20
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: o4-mini or Qwen3.5 397B-A17B?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against o4-mini (59). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, o4-mini or Qwen3.5 397B-A17B?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is cheaper at $0.60 input / $3.60 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). o4-mini costs $1.10 input / $4.40 output per million tokens (official OpenAI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.35 per million tokens for Qwen3.5 397B-A17B versus $1.93 for o4-mini (1.4× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 146.7 (#67 of 148) and o4-mini 145.6 (#76 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (144.8–148.2 vs 143.0–147.4), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 86.4%, o4-mini 79.6%; FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — o4-mini 36.1%, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 31.2%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 88.9%, o4-mini 81.7%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for o4-mini and Qwen3.5 397B-A17B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 200,000 for o4-mini. Maximum output per response: o4-mini up to 100,000, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

o4-mini accepts text and images; Qwen3.5 397B-A17B accepts text, images, audio and video. Qwen3.5 397B-A17B handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; o4-mini is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is the newest, released Feb 15, 2026. o4-mini came out Apr 16, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: o4-mini 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 Oct 4, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons