ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

DeepSeek-R1 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Qwen3 32B

Gemini 2.5 Flash comes out ahead, 68 to 51 and 51 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. DeepSeek

    DeepSeek-R1

    Released Jan 20, 2025

    51/100
    • ECI139.0
    • Price$0.70 / $2.60
    • Context128K
    Full specs Remove DeepSeek-R1
  2. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 2.5 Flash

    Released Jun 17, 2025

    68/100
    • ECI140.8
    • Price$0.30 / $2.50
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Gemini 2.5 Flash

  3. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 32B

    Released Apr 29, 2025

    51/100
    • ECI138.5
    • Price$0.70 / $2.80
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3 32B
01 — Verdict

Gemini 2.5 Flash is our pick

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against DeepSeek-R1 (51) and Qwen3 32B (51). It leads on capability, price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityGemini 2.5 FlashCapabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 2.5 Flash 140.8 · DeepSeek-R1 139.0 · Qwen3 32B 138.5
  • Lowest priceGemini 2.5 FlashGemini 2.5 Flash $0.85 · DeepSeek-R1 $1.18 · Qwen3 32B $1.23 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGemini 2.5 FlashGemini 2.5 Flash 1,048,576 · Qwen3 32B 131,072 · DeepSeek-R1 128,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 2.5 FlashDeepSeek-R1: Text · Gemini 2.5 Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · Qwen3 32B: Text
  • Self-hostingDeepSeek-R1 and Qwen3 32BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightDeepSeek-R1Gemini 2.5 FlashQwen3 32B
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%646764
Price25%475346
Inputs & features15%3510035
Context window10%246124
Overall100%51/10068/10051/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

DeepSeek-R1 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Qwen3 32B specifications side by side
SpecificationDeepSeek-R1DeepSeekGemini 2.5 FlashGoogleQwen3 32BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)139.0140.8 (best)138.5
ECI rank#104 of 148#97 of 148 (best)#106 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions71.7% (best)—65.7%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics53.3%—66.9% (best)
Price per million tokens
Input$0.70$0.30 (best)$0.70
Output$2.60$2.50 (best)$2.80
Cached input—$0.03—
Blended (3:1)$1.18$0.85 (best)$1.23
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 11 providersOfficial Google APIOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window128,000 tokens1,048,576 tokens (best)131,072 tokens
Max output32,768 tokens65,536 tokens (best)16,384 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoYesNo
PDFsNoYesNo
AudioNoYesNo
VideoNoYesNo
ReasoningYesYesYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoYesNo
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietaryOpen
API model ID—gemini-2.5-flashqwen3-32b
API providers1222 (best)14
ReleasedJan 20, 2025Jun 17, 2025Apr 29, 2025
Knowledge cutoffJul 2024Jan 2025Apr 2025
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$12.20
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash$8.00
  • Qwen3 32B$12.60
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: DeepSeek-R1, Gemini 2.5 Flash or Qwen3 32B?

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against DeepSeek-R1 (51) and Qwen3 32B (51). It leads on capability, price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-R1, Gemini 2.5 Flash or Qwen3 32B?

Gemini 2.5 Flash is cheaper at $0.30 input / $2.50 output per million tokens (official Google API price). DeepSeek-R1 costs $0.70 input / $2.60 output per million tokens (median across 11 API providers); Qwen3 32B costs $0.70 input / $2.80 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.85 per million tokens for Gemini 2.5 Flash versus $1.18 for DeepSeek-R1 (1.4× as much) and $1.23 for Qwen3 32B (1.4× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Gemini 2.5 Flash scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 2.5 Flash 140.8 (#97 of 148), DeepSeek-R1 139.0 (#104 of 148) and Qwen3 32B 138.5 (#106 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (138.5–142.3 vs 136.2–140.4), so treat the gap as small.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for DeepSeek-R1, Gemini 2.5 Flash and Qwen3 32B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Gemini 2.5 Flash leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.5 Flash has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3 32B and 128,000 for DeepSeek-R1. Maximum output per response: DeepSeek-R1 up to 32,768, Gemini 2.5 Flash up to 65,536, Qwen3 32B up to 16,384 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

DeepSeek-R1 accepts text; Gemini 2.5 Flash accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; Qwen3 32B accepts text. Gemini 2.5 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

DeepSeek-R1 and Qwen3 32B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Gemini 2.5 Flash is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the newest, released Jun 17, 2025. Qwen3 32B came out Apr 29, 2025; DeepSeek-R1 came out Jan 20, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: DeepSeek-R1 Jul 2024, Gemini 2.5 Flash Jan 2025, Qwen3 32B Apr 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