| Signal | o1-pro | Delta | Step 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 67 | -- | |
Benchmarks | 82 | +16 | |
Pricing | 100 | +100 | |
Context window size | 84 | -2 | |
Recency | 64 | -36 | |
Output Capacity | 83 | +3 | |
| Overall Result | 3 wins | of 6 | 2 wins |
30
days higher
0
days
0
days higher
OpenAI
StepFun
Step 3.5 Flash saves you $44975.00/month
That's $539700.00/year compared to o1-pro at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | o1-pro | Step 3.5 Flash | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 81 | 67 | o1-pro |
| Rank | #22 | #75 | o1-pro |
| Quality Rank | #22 | #75 | o1-pro |
| Adoption Rank | #22 | #75 | o1-pro |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 200K | 262K | Step 3.5 Flash |
| Pricing | $150.00/$600.00/M | $0.10/$0.30/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 67 | 67 | o1-pro |
| Benchmarks | 82 | 66 | o1-pro |
| Pricing | 100 | 0 | o1-pro |
| Context window size | 84 | 86 | Step 3.5 Flash |
| Recency | 64 | 100 | Step 3.5 Flash |
| Output Capacity | 83 | 80 | o1-pro |
Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from LMArena Elo, 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 81/100 (rank #22), placing it in the top 93% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 67/100 (rank #75), placing it in the top 74% of all 290 models tracked.
o1-pro has a 14-point advantage, which typically translates to noticeably better performance on complex reasoning, code generation, and multi-step tasks.
Step 3.5 Flash offers 100% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $6.00/month with Step 3.5 Flash vs $11250.00/month with o1-pro - a $11244.00 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. Step 3.5 Flash also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (262K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($0.30/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (81/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Image understanding & OCR
Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly
o1-pro clearly outperforms Step 3.5 Flash with a significant 14.200000000000003-point lead. For most general use cases, o1-pro is the stronger choice. However, Step 3.5 Flash may still excel in niche scenarios.
Best for Quality
o1-pro
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Step 3.5 Flash
100% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
o1-pro
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
o1-pro
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
o1-pro
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by OpenAI
| Capability | o1-pro | Step 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input)differs | ||
| Function Callingdiffers | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
OpenAI
StepFun
Step 3.5 Flash saves you $989.46/month
That's 100% cheaper than o1-pro 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 | o1-pro | Step 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 200K | 262K |
| Max Output Tokens | 100,000 | 65,536 |
| Open Source | No | Yes |
| Created | Mar 19, 2025 | Jan 29, 2026 |
o1-pro scores 81/100 (rank #22) compared to Step 3.5 Flash's 67/100 (rank #75), giving it a 14-point advantage. o1-pro is the stronger overall choice, though Step 3.5 Flash may excel in specific areas like cost efficiency.
o1-pro is ranked #22 and Step 3.5 Flash is ranked #75 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (90%) from LMArena, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations, with capabilities and context window as tiebreakers (10%). Scores update hourly.
Step 3.5 Flash is cheaper at $0.30/M output tokens vs o1-pro's $600.00/M output tokens - 2000.0x more expensive. Input token pricing: o1-pro at $150.00/M vs Step 3.5 Flash at $0.10/M.
Step 3.5 Flash has a larger context window of 262,144 tokens compared to o1-pro's 200,000 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.