Which model is better: OpenAI o3 or Qwen 3.8 Flash Next?
Qwen 3.8 Flash Next delivers superior performance at a massive cost advantage over OpenAI o3. It slashes input pricing by 92.0% ($0.16 vs. $2.00/1M) and output to $0.47 vs. $8.00. Furthermore, Qwen leads in latency (280ms TTFT, 870ms faster), throughput (185 vs. 82 tok/s), SWE-bench Verified (81.0% vs. 71.7%), and GPQA Diamond (91.7% vs. 87.7%).
Verified daily via automated API latency tests and official documentation.
Zero-Shot RAG Verified
Verified Performance & Unit Economics Delta (12 Dimensions)
Daily synchronized metrics across token pricing, prompt cache economics, latency, throughput, and 5 capability benchmarks.
Metric / Dimension
OpenAI o3
Qwen 3.8 Flash Next
Net Delta / Advantage
Input Cost / 1M Tokens
$2.00
$0.16
Qwen 3.8 Flash Next is 12.5x cheaper
Output Cost / 1M Tokens
$8.00
$0.47
Qwen 3.8 Flash Next (94.1% lower)
Prompt Cache Read / 1M
$0.500
$0.016
Qwen 3.8 Flash Next is 31.3x cheaper
Prompt Cache Write / 1M
$2.00
$0.20
Qwen 3.8 Flash Next is 10.0x cheaper
Context Window (Max Output)
205k (100k out)
268k (66k out)
Qwen 3.8 Flash Next (1.3x larger context)
Avg TTFT Response Latency
1150ms
280ms
Qwen 3.8 Flash Next (870ms faster)
Generation Speed (Throughput)
82 tok/s
185 tok/s
Qwen 3.8 Flash Next (+103 tok/s faster)
SWE-bench Verified (Coding)
71.7%
81%
Qwen 3.8 Flash Next (+9.3% lead)
GPQA Diamond (PhD STEM)
87.7%
91.7%
Qwen 3.8 Flash Next (+4.0% lead)
MMLU-Pro (Multi-Discipline)
89.8%
88.4%
OpenAI o3 (+1.4% lead)
MATH-500 (Quantitative Logic)
98.6%
95.7%
OpenAI o3 (+2.9% lead)
Inference Value Score (IVR)
60.6 / 100
85.1 / 100
Qwen 3.8 Flash Next (+24.5 pts)
Interactive Monthly Token Economics & ROI Forecaster
Model production workloads across prompt, completion, and cached context tokens, or switch models on the fly.
Which is cheaper: OpenAI o3 or Qwen 3.8 Flash Next?
Qwen 3.8 Flash Next is cheaper at $0.16/1M input tokens ($0.47/1M output) compared to $2.00/1M input ($8.00/1M output) for OpenAI o3.
Which model has lower TTFT latency and higher tok/s throughput: OpenAI o3 or Qwen 3.8 Flash Next?
Qwen 3.8 Flash Next delivers faster first-token latency at 280ms TTFT (185 tok/s throughput) compared to 1150ms TTFT (82 tok/s) for OpenAI o3.
How do OpenAI o3 and Qwen 3.8 Flash Next compare on SWE-bench coding and GPQA Diamond reasoning?
On SWE-bench Verified software engineering, OpenAI o3 scores 71.7% versus 81% for Qwen 3.8 Flash Next. On GPQA Diamond graduate-level STEM reasoning, OpenAI o3 scores 87.7% versus 91.7% for Qwen 3.8 Flash Next (and 98.6% vs 95.7% on MATH-500).
When should you choose OpenAI o3?
Choose OpenAI o3 (OpenAI) for algorithmic synthesis, mathematical verification, PhD-level scientific research, and multi-step tool planning — offering a 204k context window, 1150ms TTFT, and $2.00/1M input pricing ($0.500/1M cached reads).
When should you choose Qwen 3.8 Flash Next?
Choose Qwen 3.8 Flash Next (Alibaba Cloud) for next-generation open-weight multimodal MoE activating only 6B parameters per token for ultra-low-cost enterprise office automation, tool calling, and multilingual repository engineering — offering a 268k context window, 280ms TTFT, and $0.16/1M input pricing ($0.016/1M cached reads).
