Head-to-head · multimodal vs multimodal

Doubao 1.5 Pro Max vs o3 Vision: which model should you choose?

We compared Doubao 1.5 Pro Max and o3 Vision on price, context window and 12 benchmarks. o3 Vision has the stronger average benchmark score; o3 Vision is cheaper on a blended 3:1 basis.

ByteDance

Doubao 1.5 Pro Max

Doubao 1.5 Pro Max is a multimodal model from ByteDance. It offers a 400,000-token context window, costs $14.93 per million input tokens and $73.69 per million output tokens, and averages 81.2 across the index's benchmark suite.

Input
$14.93 / 1M
Output
$73.69 / 1M
Context
400,000
Avg score
81.2
Open weights
No
Full Doubao 1.5 Pro Max page
OpenAI

o3 Vision

o3 Vision is a multimodal model from OpenAI. It offers a 1,000,000-token context window, costs $15.24 per million input tokens and $65.25 per million output tokens, and averages 81.8 across the index's benchmark suite.

Input
$15.24 / 1M
Output
$65.25 / 1M
Context
1,000,000
Avg score
81.8
Open weights
No
Full o3 Vision page

Specification comparison

SpecDoubao 1.5 Pro Maxo3 VisionEdge
Input price / 1M$14.93$15.24A
Output price / 1M$73.69$65.25B
Context window400,0001,000,000B
Max output4,0968,192B
Average score81.281.8B
Arena Elo1447.51436.5A
Open weightsNoNoTie

Benchmark comparison

Doubao 1.5 Pro Max wins 4, o3 Vision wins 8, and 0 benchmarks are tied. The table shows the modelled score for each model and the gap.

BenchmarkDoubao 1.5 Pro Maxo3 VisionGapWinner
MMLU-Pro81.183.62.5o3 Vision
GPQA Diamond76.177.81.7o3 Vision
SWE-bench Verified70.771.81.1o3 Vision
HumanEval84.085.61.6o3 Vision
MATH-50085.384.40.9Doubao 1.5 Pro Max
AIME 202580.482.42.0o3 Vision
LiveCodeBench73.573.70.2o3 Vision
IFEval90.289.30.9Doubao 1.5 Pro Max
TruthfulQA84.485.81.4o3 Vision
HellaSwag87.889.71.9o3 Vision
MMMU79.375.73.6Doubao 1.5 Pro Max
Arena Elo1447.51436.511.0Doubao 1.5 Pro Max

Price analysis

On a blended 3:1 input-to-output basis, Doubao 1.5 Pro Max costs about $29.62 per million tokens and o3 Vision costs about $27.74. o3 Vision is roughly 6% cheaper than Doubao 1.5 Pro Max. At high volume, that gap compounds quickly, so price should carry real weight unless the quality difference is decisive.

o3 Vision has the larger context window at 1,000,000 tokens, compared with 400,000 for Doubao 1.5 Pro Max. That matters for long documents, large codebases and multi-step agent traces.

Verdict

Across 12 shared benchmarks, Doubao 1.5 Pro Max wins 4, o3 Vision wins 8, and 0 are tied. On the index average, o3 Vision leads Doubao 1.5 Pro Max by 0.6 points (81.8 versus 81.2).

The price picture favours o3 Vision. The context picture favours o3 Vision. Those two dimensions often matter more than a few benchmark points once a model is good enough for the task.

If you need a single default, start with o3 Vision for quality-sensitive work, and check whether its price holds at your expected volume before committing.

Choose Doubao 1.5 Pro Max if

  • You prefer ByteDance's tooling or already use it.

Choose o3 Vision if

  • You want the higher average benchmark score in this index.
  • Unit cost matters and you want the cheaper blended price.
  • You need the larger 1,000,000-token context window.
  • You need the larger 8,192-token output limit.

FAQ

Is Doubao 1.5 Pro Max better than o3 Vision?

On the index average, o3 Vision leads Doubao 1.5 Pro Max by 0.6 points (81.8 versus 81.2). The better choice depends on price, context and your task. Doubao 1.5 Pro Max wins 4 benchmarks, o3 Vision wins 8.

Which is cheaper, Doubao 1.5 Pro Max or o3 Vision?

o3 Vision is cheaper on a blended 3:1 basis at about $27.74 per million tokens, versus $29.62 for Doubao 1.5 Pro Max.

Which has the larger context window?

o3 Vision has the larger context window at 1,000,000 tokens. Doubao 1.5 Pro Max has 400,000 tokens.

Are these models open weights?

Doubao 1.5 Pro Max is proprietary; o3 Vision is proprietary.

Which should I choose for production?

If you need a single default, start with o3 Vision for quality-sensitive work, and check whether its price holds at your expected volume before committing.

Related comparisons