Mazda CX-90 vs Omoda 9
A detailed look at how two of Australia's most popular SUVs compare on price, running costs, safety, and everyday livability.
Specifications and pricing correct at time of publishing. Prices are RRP before on-road costs unless stated otherwise. Always confirm with the manufacturer or dealer before purchasing.
Price Breakdown
The Mazda CX-90 starts from $74,385 before on-road costs, while the Omoda 9 opens at $61,990. That makes the Omoda 9 the more affordable entry point by $12,395.
Once you factor in stamp duty, registration, CTP insurance, and dealer delivery, expect to add roughly 8-12% on top of the RRP depending on your state. That puts estimated driveaway prices in the ballpark of $81,824 and $68,189 respectively.
The Omoda 9 qualifies for FBT exemption as an electric vehicle, which can dramatically reduce the effective cost for novated lease buyers. The Mazda CX-90, as a petrol model, does not qualify.
Over 5 years, the running costs favour the Omoda 9 by roughly $11,350 in fuel alone.
Safety Rundown
Both the Mazda CX-90 and Omoda 9 hold a 5-star ANCAP safety rating. Adult occupant protection scored 91% for the Mazda CX-90 and 90% for the Omoda 9.
Where the two diverge is in active safety technology. The Omoda 9 packs more ADAS features with 7 out of 10 key systems fitted, compared to 6 in the Mazda CX-90.
Both include the essentials: autonomous emergency braking, lane keep assist, adaptive cruise control, a reversing camera. Airbag count is 6 in the Mazda CX-90 and 8 in the Omoda 9. The Omoda 9 adds a 360-degree camera that the Mazda CX-90 misses.
Feature Showdown
The Mazda CX-90 features a 10.3-inch touchscreen, while the Omoda 9 gets a 12.3-inch display. Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are standard across both.
The Omoda 9 counters with head-up display, panoramic roof, heated front seats, ventilated seats, Sony audio and ambient lighting that the Mazda CX-90 does not offer. Which feature set matters more depends on your daily routine and priorities.
Drivetrain
The Mazda CX-90 uses a Petrol producing 254kW and 500Nm of torque, sent through a automatic to a AWD layout. It covers the 0-100km/h sprint in 7.8 seconds.
The Omoda 9 responds with a Plug-in Hybrid making 105kW and 215Nm, paired to a automatic driving all four wheels. It gets to 100km/h in 4.9 seconds.
The Mazda CX-90 has the clear power advantage at 254kW vs 105kW. In the real-world sprint, the Omoda 9 is 2.9s quicker. For most buyers, the way each car feels day-to-day matters more than outright acceleration.
Space & Comfort
The Mazda CX-90 measures 5,120mm long on a 3,120mm wheelbase, 345mm longer than the Omoda 9 at 4,775mm (2,800mm wheelbase). The longer wheelbase on the Mazda CX-90 generally means more rear legroom.
Boot space is 257L in the Mazda CX-90 and 660L in the Omoda 9, giving the Omoda 9 a 403L advantage. The Mazda CX-90 seats 7 vs 5.
For towing, the Mazda CX-90 leads with a 2,500kg braked capacity vs 1,500kg. That 1,000kg difference matters if you regularly hitch up.
Turning Circle
Kerb-to-kerb diameter. Smaller turns easier in tight carparks and U-turns.
10.8m to 11.4m
Based on 10.8m turning circle:
- U-turn on standard street (7m+ wide)
- Standard parking bay
- Tight carparks
- Narrow laneways
Based on 11.4m turning circle:
- U-turn on standard street (7m+ wide)
- Standard parking bay
- Tight carparks
- Narrow laneways
Turning circle ratings
True Cost to Own
Based on 15,000km of annual driving, fuel costs roughly $2,337/year for the Mazda CX-90 and $67/year for the Omoda 9. That is a $2,270 annual difference in favour of the Omoda 9.
Estimated annual total: $2,337 (Mazda CX-90) vs $67 (Omoda 9). The Omoda 9 saves you roughly $2,270 per year in total ownership costs. Use our Fuel Cost Calculator to estimate based on your driving.
Warranty: 5 years / 999,999km (Mazda CX-90) vs 8 years / 999,999km (Omoda 9). The Omoda 9 has longer coverage.
Who Should Buy Which?
Buy the Mazda CX-90 if: You prioritise performance, need stronger towing, or prefer Mazda's approach to design and ownership experience.
Buy the Omoda 9 if: You want the lower entry price, need more boot space, want lower running costs, value a longer warranty, or prefer Omoda's approach to design and ownership experience.
The Verdict
The Omoda 9 takes 6 of 8 key spec categories and comes in at a lower price. The Omoda 9 will save you roughly $2,270 a year in fuel. If boot space matters, the Omoda 9 has a clear edge. The Omoda 9 adds peace of mind with a longer 8-year warranty. The best pick depends on what you value most. Explore the full specs for each model below.
Common questions
Which is cheapest, Mazda CX-90 and Omoda 9?
The Omoda 9 is the cheapest at $61,990 before on-road costs. That undercuts the Mazda CX-90 by $12,395.
Which is the most fuel-efficient?
The Omoda 9 uses the least fuel at 1.4L/100km on the combined cycle.
Which is safest?
They are evenly matched — Mazda CX-90 and Omoda 9 all hold a 5-star ANCAP rating. Compare the active-safety features above to separate them.
Which has the most boot space?
The Omoda 9 has the largest boot at 660L.
Which can tow the most?
The Mazda CX-90 has the highest braked towing capacity at 2,500kg.
Which has the best warranty?
The Omoda 9 has the longest warranty at 8 years / 1000k km.
Which is the most powerful?
The Mazda CX-90 makes the most power at 254kW. The Omoda 9 is quickest to 100km/h in 4.9s.
Disclaimer: All information in this comparison was believed to be correct at the time of publishing (20 April 2026). Prices are manufacturer recommended retail prices (RRP) and may vary by state, dealer, and options. Driveaway costs include estimated on-road costs for Victoria. Fuel economy figures are WLTP/ADR combined cycle. Specifications can change without notice. Always verify with the manufacturer before making a purchase decision. CarSorted does not accept payment for recommendations.
Auto-generated from CarSorted's specification data · 20 April 2026
Comments (0)
Sign in to join the conversation
No comments yet. Be the first!
