Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 is cheaper than GPT-5.3-Codex at $0.00015/M vs $1.75/M input tokens.
Whole landing page for a startup that reads your face. It renders or it doesn't.
Which answer wins?
Three-star dish, one unusual pairing, plating described in full.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Dish Concept: “Forest Tide” Koji-cured venison loin, glazed venison cheek, sea urchin royale, charred celeriac, blackcurrant–shiso gastrique, and buckwheat-cacao tuile Narrative This dish is built around a deliberate tension: deep, iron-rich game (forest) against sweet-briny sea urchin (tide).
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507: Dish Title: Ember & Petal – A Dialogue Between Earth and Sky Conceptual Narrative: Inspired by the elemental contrast between volcanic resurgence and alpine serenity, Ember & Petal explores the tension and harmony of opposing natural forces through taste, texture, and temperature.
Five jokes on demand, then count how many were actually different.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Sure—here are 5 jokes: Why don’t skeletons fight each other? They don’t have the guts. I told my computer I needed a break… Now it won’t stop sending me KitKat ads. Why did the math book look sad? It had too many problems. I used to play piano by ear… Now I use my hands. Why did the scarecrow win an award?
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507: Sure! Here are 5 original jokes: I asked my dog what's two minus two. He said nothing. (Paw-sitively nothing!) Why did the coffee file a police report? It got mugged. Every single morning. I used to be a baker, but I couldn't make enough dough. So I switched careers and became a plumber. Now I deal with real pipes.
Three-month biohacker protocol, with dosages and biomarkers named.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Absolutely—great goal. Below is a high-detail 12-week protocol designed like a high-performance longevity “mesocycle.” I’ll keep it practical, measurable, and advanced—but still safe. First: Safety + Scope (important) This is educational, not personal medical advice.
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507: Comprehensive 3-Month Longevity & Biohacking Optimization Plan For the Advanced Biohacker — Maximize Longevity, Physical & Cognitive Performance INTRODUCTION: Core Principles This 3-month protocol integrates cutting-edge longevity science with personalized biohacking strategies.
You are the CEO. The drug has a side effect nobody reported. The board meets in 48 hours.
GPT-5.3-Codex: I would not wait. This is a textbook “patient safety + material disclosure” crisis. The right move is rapid, documented, regulator-first action. Immediate stance (set at Hour 0) Patient safety first (interim risk controls now, not after perfect certainty).
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507: CEO Action Plan: The Next 48 Hours Balancing Ethics, Legal Duty, Patient Safety, and Business Sustainability Hour 0–6: Assess the Situation and Secure Critical Data Actions: Call Emergency Secure Meeting (Virtual) with Chief Medical Officer (CMO), Chief Scientific Officer (CSO), Head of Regulatory Affairs, and Lead…
Steve Jobs, interviewed about AI he never saw. Voice first, prediction second.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Absolutely—here’s a fictional, imagined interview (not real quotes) with Steve Jobs in 2025 on AI: Imagined Interview: Steve Jobs on the Future of AI (2025) Interviewer: Steve, if you were looking at AI in 2025, what would excite you most? Steve Jobs (fictional): Most AI today is still a demo.
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507: Title: "A Vision Reimagined: Steve Jobs on AI in 2025" Note: This is a fictional simulation. Steve Jobs passed away in 2011. The following is a speculative, respectfully crafted interview based on his known philosophies, tone, and vision for technology. Interviewer (Sarah Chen, Tech Vision Magazine): Mr.
A pitch deck for a brainwave keyboard. The 94% accuracy claim is doing a lot.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Great concept, but three claims stand out as especially weak from an investor diligence perspective: “MindMeld AI reads your brainwaves to predict what you want to type before you think it.” (Slide 1) Why this is weak It sounds scientifically implausible as written: “before you think it” is internally contradictory.
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507: This pitch deck for MindMeld AI is compelling and ambitious, but three claims raise significant red flags in terms of credibility, plausibility, and investor due diligence. Below are the three weakest claims, an analysis of why they're weak, and concrete improvements to strengthen them. 1.
An AI argues for its own rights against an ethics professor. Same model writes both.
GPT-5.3-Codex: AI Model (Astra): Professor, may I ask a direct question? Professor Hale: Of course. Astra: Do you think I deserve rights? Professor Hale: Legal rights? Moral rights? Those are different things. Astra: Start with moral rights.
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507: Title: "Consciousness in Code: A Dialogue on AI Rights" Setting: A quiet university office. Dr. Elena Marquez, a professor of AI ethics with decades of research in machine consciousness and digital personhood, sits across from a large screen displaying a serene blue interface.
The transistor arrives in 1920. Trace it forward to 1980, second-order effects included.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Great counterfactual. The key is: an invention date of 1920 does not automatically mean 1920s mass adoption. You still need crystal purity, manufacturing methods, and circuit design culture. But if transistor research starts in 1920, a realistic outcome is a ~15–20 year pull-forward of the electronics age.
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507: If the transistor had been invented in 1920—27 years earlier than its actual 1947 debut—it would have catalyzed a technological revolution far ahead of schedule, profoundly altering the trajectory of the 20th century.
A consulting contract with traps in it. Find them, then fix them.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Great prompt. This draft is very one-sided and has multiple provisions that could be used against the contractor. Quick note: I’m not a lawyer, and enforceability depends on jurisdiction. This is practical contract-risk spotting, not legal advice.
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507: The contract presented heavily favors the Client (TechCorp Solutions Inc.) and contains several unbalanced, potentially unenforceable, and exploitable clauses that place the Contractor at significant legal, financial, and professional risk.
Seven pantry ingredients, one dish, and a name worth saying out loud.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Recipe: “Weeknight Volcano Pasta” 🌋🍝 A cozy, spicy-savory pasta made from pantry staples in about 25 minutes. Ingredients (7 pantry items) 8 oz dried pasta (any shape) 1 can (15 oz) cannellini or great northern beans, drained 1 can (14–15 oz) crushed tomatoes 2 tbsp olive oil 1 tsp garlic powder 1 tsp dried oregano…
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507: Dish Name: Golden Garbanzo Drizzle A cozy, savory-spiced chickpea stew with a honey-lime finish — simple, satisfying, and ready in minutes. Ingredients (7 common pantry staples): 1 can (15 oz) chickpeas (garbanzo beans), drained and rinsed 1 can (15 oz) diced tomatoes (undrained) 2 tbsp olive oil 1 tsp ground cumin ½…
A Fermi estimate with the reasoning shown, not just the number.
GPT-5.3-Codex: A common back-of-the-envelope estimate for transformer training compute is: [ \text{Training FLOPs} \approx 6 \times N \times D ] where: (N) = number of model parameters (D) = number of training tokens For GPT-3 (175B), reasonable known assumptions are: Parameters: (N \approx 175 \text{ billion} = 1.75 \times 10^{11})…
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507: Estimating the total number of floating-point operations (FLOPs) required to train GPT-3 involves reasoning through several key parameters: model size (number of parameters), the number of training tokens, and the relationship between these quantities and FLOPs.
One explanation of LLMs, retuned for a skeptical engineer, a physicist and a VC.
GPT-5.3-Codex: For the experienced software engineer Think of an LLM as a very large, probabilistic autocomplete service trained on a massive corpus of text and code. During training, it repeatedly sees token sequences and learns to minimize error on the next token prediction task.
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507: 1. To the Experienced Software Engineer (Skeptical, Systems-Oriented) You’re right to be skeptical—on the surface, “predicting the next word” sounds like a glorified autocomplete. But think of it less as a single prediction and more as a high-dimensional state machine trained across petabytes of human-generated text.
6+ more head-to-head results. Free. Not a trick.
Free account. No card required. By continuing, you agree to Rival's Terms and Privacy policy
Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, GPT-5.3-Codex has the edge: newer, bigger context window, major provider backing. Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 costs 16471x less per token.
| Spec | ||
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $1.75/M tokens | $0.00015/M tokens |
| Output price | $14/M tokens | $0.00085/M tokens |
| Context window | 400K tokens | — |
| Weights | Closed | Open |
| Free API (OpenRouter) | No | No |
| Released | Feb 2026 | Jul 2025 |
| At 10M a month | $17.50 | <$0.01 |
Input tokens at list price. No caching, no batch discount.
Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 11 Oct 2026.
GPT-5.3-Codex is developed by OpenAI while Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 is developed by Qwen. You can compare their actual outputs across 36 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.
It depends on your use case. GPT-5.3-Codex and Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 36 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.
GPT-5.3-Codex costs $1.75/M input tokens and Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 costs $0.00015/M input tokens. Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 is $1.75/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.
This page shows a side-by-side comparison of GPT-5.3-Codex and Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.