ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

DeepSeek-R1 vs o3 vs Qwen3 32B

o3 comes out ahead, 58 to 51 and 51 on our weighted score, though DeepSeek-R1 is 3× cheaper per token.

  1. DeepSeek

    DeepSeek-R1

    Released Jan 20, 2025

    51/100
    • ECI139.0
    • Price$0.70 / $2.60
    • Context128K
  2. Our pick

    OpenAI

    o3

    Released Apr 16, 2025

    58/100
    • ECI146.9
    • Price$2.00 / $8.00
    • Context200K
  3. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 32B

    Released Apr 29, 2025

    51/100
    • ECI138.5
    • Price$0.70 / $2.80
    • Context131K
01 — Verdict

o3 is our pick

o3 is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against DeepSeek-R1 (51) and Qwen3 32B (51). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • Capabilityo3Capabilities Index (ECI): o3 146.9 · DeepSeek-R1 139.0 · Qwen3 32B 138.5
  • Lowest priceDeepSeek-R1DeepSeek-R1 $1.18 · Qwen3 32B $1.23 · o3 $3.50 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contexto3o3 200,000 · Qwen3 32B 131,072 · DeepSeek-R1 128,000 tokens
  • Widest inputso3DeepSeek-R1: Text · o3: Text, Images, PDFs · Qwen3 32B: Text
  • Self-hostingDeepSeek-R1 and Qwen3 32BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightDeepSeek-R1o3Qwen3 32B
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%647464
Price25%472446
Inputs & features15%358035
Context window10%243224
Overall100%51/10058/10051/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

DeepSeek-R1 vs o3 vs Qwen3 32B specifications side by side
SpecificationDeepSeek-R1DeepSeeko3OpenAIQwen3 32BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)139.0146.9 (best)138.5
ECI rank#104 of 148#63 of 148 (best)#106 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions71.7%81.8% (best)65.7%
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics—33.3%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics53.3%84.4% (best)66.9%
SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues—62.3%—
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions—49.4%—
Price per million tokens
Input$0.70 (best)$2.00$0.70 (best)
Output$2.60 (best)$8.00$2.80
Cached input—$0.50—
Blended (3:1)$1.18 (best)$3.50$1.23
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 11 providersOfficial OpenAI APIOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window128,000 tokens200,000 tokens (best)131,072 tokens
Max output32,768 tokens100,000 tokens (best)16,384 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoYesNo
PDFsNoYesNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningYesYeslow · medium · highYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoYesNo
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietaryOpen
API model ID—o3qwen3-32b
API providers1218 (best)14
ReleasedJan 20, 2025Apr 16, 2025Apr 29, 2025
Knowledge cutoffJul 2024May 2024Apr 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
  • o3$36.00
  • Qwen3 32B$12.60
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: DeepSeek-R1, o3 or Qwen3 32B?

o3 is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against DeepSeek-R1 (51) and Qwen3 32B (51). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-R1, o3 or Qwen3 32B?

DeepSeek-R1 is cheaper at $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); o3 costs $2.00 input / $8.00 output per million tokens (official OpenAI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.18 per million tokens for DeepSeek-R1 versus $1.23 for Qwen3 32B (1× as much) and $3.50 for o3 (3× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

o3 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): o3 146.9 (#63 of 148), DeepSeek-R1 139.0 (#104 of 148) and Qwen3 32B 138.5 (#106 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (144.9–148.6 vs 136.2–140.4), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — o3 81.8%, DeepSeek-R1 71.7%, Qwen3 32B 65.7%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — o3 84.4%, Qwen3 32B 66.9%, DeepSeek-R1 53.3%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for DeepSeek-R1 and Qwen3 32B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, o3 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?

o3 has the largest context window at 200,000 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3 32B and 128,000 for DeepSeek-R1. Maximum output per response: DeepSeek-R1 up to 32,768, o3 up to 100,000, Qwen3 32B up to 16,384 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

DeepSeek-R1 accepts text; o3 accepts text, images and PDFs; Qwen3 32B accepts text. o3 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; o3 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3 32B is the newest, released Apr 29, 2025. o3 came out Apr 16, 2025; DeepSeek-R1 came out Jan 20, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: DeepSeek-R1 Jul 2024, o3 May 2024, 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.