| Signal | o3 Mini High | Delta | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 67 | -- | |
Benchmarks | 62 | -1 | |
Pricing | 4 | +4 | |
Context window size | 84 | +3 | |
Recency | 58 | -38 | |
Output Capacity | 83 | +8 | |
| Overall Result | 3 wins | of 6 | 2 wins |
7
days higher
3
days
20
days higher
OpenAI
Alibaba
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking saves you $281.25/month
That's $3375.00/year compared to o3 Mini High at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | o3 Mini High | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 63 | 64 | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking |
| Rank | #88 | #86 | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking |
| Quality Rank | #88 | #86 | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking |
| Adoption Rank | #88 | #86 | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking |
| Parameters | -- | 80B | -- |
| Context Window | 200K | 131K | o3 Mini High |
| Pricing | $1.10/$4.40/M | $0.10/$0.78/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 67 | 67 | o3 Mini High |
| Benchmarks | 62 | 63 | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking |
| Pricing | 4 | 1 | o3 Mini High |
| Context window size | 84 | 81 | o3 Mini High |
| Recency | 58 | 96 | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking |
| Output Capacity | 83 | 75 | o3 Mini High |
Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Here's what the scores mean for these two models:
Scores 63/100 (rank #88), placing it in the top 70% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 64/100 (rank #86), placing it in the top 71% of all 290 models tracked.
With only a 1-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal - your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking offers 84% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $13.16/month with Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking vs $82.50/month with o3 Mini High - a $69.34 monthly difference.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (200K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($0.78/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (64/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
o3 Mini High and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking are extremely close in overall performance (only 0.6000000000000014 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.
Best for Quality
o3 Mini High
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
84% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
o3 Mini High
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
o3 Mini High
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
o3 Mini High
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by OpenAI
by Alibaba
| Capability | o3 Mini High | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input) | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
OpenAI
Alibaba
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking saves you $6.15/month
That's 85% cheaper than o3 Mini High at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | o3 Mini High | Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 200K | 131K |
| Max Output Tokens | 100,000 | 32,768 |
| Open Source | No | Yes |
| Created | Feb 12, 2025 | Sep 11, 2025 |
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking scores 64/100 (rank #86) compared to o3 Mini High's 63/100 (rank #88), giving it a 1-point advantage. Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking is the stronger overall choice, though o3 Mini High may excel in specific areas like certain benchmarks.
o3 Mini High is ranked #88 and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking is ranked #86 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (90%) from MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations, with capabilities and context window as tiebreakers (10%). Scores update hourly.
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking is cheaper at $0.78/M output tokens vs o3 Mini High's $4.40/M output tokens - 5.6x more expensive. Input token pricing: o3 Mini High at $1.10/M vs Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking at $0.10/M.
o3 Mini High has a larger context window of 200,000 tokens compared to Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking's 131,072 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.