ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3 32B vs o3

o3 comes out ahead, 58 to 51 on our weighted score, though Qwen3 32B is 2.9× cheaper per token.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 32B

    Released Apr 29, 2025

    51/100
    • ECI138.5
    • Price$0.70 / $2.80
    • Context131K
  2. Our pick

    OpenAI

    o3

    Released Apr 16, 2025

    58/100
    • ECI146.9
    • Price$2.00 / $8.00
    • Context200K
  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

o3 is our pick

o3 is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against Qwen3 32B (51). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. Qwen3 32B wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • Capabilityo3Capabilities Index (ECI): o3 146.9 · Qwen3 32B 138.5
  • Lowest priceQwen3 32BQwen3 32B $1.23 · o3 $3.50 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contexto3o3 200,000 · Qwen3 32B 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputso3Qwen3 32B: Text · o3: Text, Images, PDFs
  • Self-hostingQwen3 32BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3 32Bo3
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%6474
Price25%4624
Inputs & features15%3580
Context window10%2432
Overall100%51/10058/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Qwen3 32B vs o3 specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3 32BAlibaba (Qwen)o3OpenAI
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)138.5146.9 (best)
ECI rank#106 of 148#63 of 148 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions65.7%81.8% (best)
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics—33.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics66.9%84.4% (best)
SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues—62.3%
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions—49.4%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.70 (best)$2.00
Output$2.80 (best)$8.00
Cached input—$0.50
Blended (3:1)$1.23 (best)$3.50
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Alibaba APIOfficial OpenAI API
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens200,000 tokens (best)
Max output16,384 tokens100,000 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoYes
PDFsNoYes
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningYesYeslow · medium · high
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoYes
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietary
API model IDqwen3-32bo3
API providers1418 (best)
ReleasedApr 29, 2025Apr 16, 2025
Knowledge cutoffApr 2025May 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.

  • Qwen3 32B$12.60
  • o3$36.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3 32B or o3?

o3 is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against Qwen3 32B (51). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. Qwen3 32B wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3 32B or o3?

Qwen3 32B is cheaper at $0.70 input / $2.80 output per million tokens (official Alibaba 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 32B versus $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) and Qwen3 32B 138.5 (#106 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (144.9–148.6 vs 135.1–140.4), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — o3 81.8%, Qwen3 32B 65.7%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — o3 84.4%, Qwen3 32B 66.9%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3 32B 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. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

o3 has the largest context window at 200,000 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3 32B. Maximum output per response: Qwen3 32B up to 16,384, o3 up to 100,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3 32B accepts text; o3 accepts text, images and PDFs. o3 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Qwen3 32B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; o3 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3 32B is the newest, released Apr 29, 2025. o3 came out Apr 16, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen3 32B Apr 2025, o3 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.