ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B vs Qwen3.5 9B

Qwen3.5 9B comes out ahead, 64 to 47 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. DeepSeek

    DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B

    Released Jan 20, 2025

    47/100
    • ECI137.4
    • Price—
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B
  2. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.5 9B

    Released Feb 23, 2026

    64/100
    • ECI139.5
    • Price$0.10 / $0.15
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.5 9B

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Qwen3.5 9B is our pick

Qwen3.5 9B is the better all-round choice, scoring 64/100 against DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B (47). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 67%, inputs & features 20%, context window 13%.

  • CapabilityQwen3.5 9BCapabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.5 9B 139.5 · DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B 137.4
  • Lowest priceQwen3.5 9BQwen3.5 9B $0.113 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B unpriced
  • Longest contextQwen3.5 9BQwen3.5 9B 262,144 · DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.5 9BDeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B: Text · Qwen3.5 9B: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightDeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32BQwen3.5 9B
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)67%6265
Inputs & features20%1080
Context window13%2437
Overall100%47/10064/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: price. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B vs Qwen3.5 9B specifications side by side
SpecificationDeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32BDeepSeekQwen3.5 9BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)137.4139.5 (best)
ECI rank#110 of 148#101 of 148 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions64.1%79.0% (best)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics55.6%61.7% (best)
Price per million tokens
Input—$0.10
Output—$0.15
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)—$0.113
Long-context rate—Same rate
Price source—Median of 14 providers
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens262,144 tokens (best)
Max output32,768 tokens65,536 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoYes
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoYes
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingNoYes
Structured outputNoYes
Availability
WeightsOpenOpen
API model ID——
API providers—15
ReleasedJan 20, 2025Feb 23, 2026
Knowledge cutoff——
03 — Cost

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—
  • Qwen3.5 9B$1.30
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B or Qwen3.5 9B?

Qwen3.5 9B is the better all-round choice, scoring 64/100 against DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B (47). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 67%, inputs & features 20%, context window 13%.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B or Qwen3.5 9B?

Qwen3.5 9B is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.15 output per million tokens (median across 14 API providers). . At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.113 per million tokens for Qwen3.5 9B versus . DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B has no published per-token price.

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Qwen3.5 9B scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.5 9B 139.5 (#101 of 148) and DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B 137.4 (#110 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (136.5–141.3 vs 130.7–138.7), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Qwen3.5 9B 79.0%, DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B 64.1%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3.5 9B 61.7%, DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B 55.6%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B and Qwen3.5 9B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen3.5 9B 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?

Qwen3.5 9B has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 131,072 for DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B. Maximum output per response: DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B up to 32,768, Qwen3.5 9B up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B accepts text; Qwen3.5 9B accepts text, images and video. Qwen3.5 9B handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, both publish their weights, so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.5 9B is the newest, released Feb 23, 2026. DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B came out Jan 20, 2025.

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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons