DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B vs DeepSeek-R1
DeepSeek-R1 comes out ahead, 53 to 47 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
DeepSeekDeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B
47/100- ECI137.4
- Price—
- Context131K
- Our pickDeepSeek
DeepSeek-R1
53/100- ECI139.0
- Price$0.70 / $2.60
- Context128K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
DeepSeek-R1 is our pick
DeepSeek-R1 is the better all-round choice, scoring 53/100 against DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B (47). It leads on capability and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 67%, inputs & features 20%, context window 13%.
- CapabilityDeepSeek-R1Capabilities Index (ECI): DeepSeek-R1 139.0 · DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B 137.4
- Lowest priceDeepSeek-R1DeepSeek-R1 $1.18 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B unpriced
- Longest contextDeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32BDeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B 131,072 · DeepSeek-R1 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsDeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B: Text · DeepSeek-R1: Text
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B | DeepSeek-R1 |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 67% | 62 | 64 |
| Inputs & features | 20% | 10 | 35 |
| Context window | 13% | 24 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 47/100 | 53/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: price. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32BDeepSeek | DeepSeek-R1DeepSeek |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 137.4 | 139.0 (best) |
| ECI rank | #110 of 148 | #104 of 148 (best) |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 64.1% | 71.7% (best) |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 55.6% (best) | 53.3% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | — | $0.70 |
| Output | — | $2.60 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | — | $1.18 |
| Long-context rate | — | Same rate |
| Price source | — | Median of 11 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 131,072 tokens (best) | 128,000 tokens |
| Max output | 32,768 tokens | 32,768 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | No | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Open |
| API model ID | — | — |
| API providers | — | 12 |
| Released | Jan 20, 2025 | Jan 20, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Jul 2024 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B—
- DeepSeek-R1$12.20
Which should you choose?
Which is better: DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B or DeepSeek-R1?
DeepSeek-R1 is the better all-round choice, scoring 53/100 against DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B (47). It leads on capability and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 67%, inputs & features 20%, context window 13%.
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B or DeepSeek-R1?
DeepSeek-R1 is cheaper at $0.70 input / $2.60 output per million tokens (median across 11 API providers). . At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.18 per million tokens for DeepSeek-R1 versus . DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B has no published per-token price.
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
DeepSeek-R1 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): DeepSeek-R1 139.0 (#104 of 148) and DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B 137.4 (#110 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (136.2–140.4 vs 130.7–138.7), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — DeepSeek-R1 71.7%, DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B 64.1%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B 55.6%, DeepSeek-R1 53.3%.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B and DeepSeek-R1 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, DeepSeek-R1 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Note that DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B has the largest context window at 131,072 tokens, against 128,000 for DeepSeek-R1. Maximum output per response: DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B up to 32,768, DeepSeek-R1 up to 32,768 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B accepts text; DeepSeek-R1 accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, both publish their weights, so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B is the newest, released Jan 20, 2025. DeepSeek-R1 came out Jan 20, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: DeepSeek-R1 Jul 2024.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add QwQ 32BThree-way comparison
- DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B vs QwQ 32BAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 137.6
- DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B vs GPT-4.1OpenAI · ECI 136.8
- DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B vs Gemini 2.0 FlashGoogle · ECI 134.7
- DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B vs Claude Sonnet 3.7Anthropic · ECI 141.2
- DeepSeek-R1 vs Qwen3 235B-A22BAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 139.4
- DeepSeek-R1 vs Gemini 2.5 FlashGoogle · ECI 140.8
