ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

DeepSeek-R1 vs Qwen3 32B

Too close to call on our weighted score (DeepSeek-R1 51, Qwen3 32B 51). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. DeepSeek

    DeepSeek-R1

    Released Jan 20, 2025

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

  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 32B

    Released Apr 29, 2025

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

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (DeepSeek-R1 51/100, Qwen3 32B 51/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: DeepSeek-R1 for raw capability and Qwen3 32B for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityDeepSeek-R1Capabilities Index (ECI): DeepSeek-R1 139.0 · Qwen3 32B 138.5
  • Lowest priceDeepSeek-R1DeepSeek-R1 $1.18 · Qwen3 32B $1.23 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3 32BQwen3 32B 131,072 · DeepSeek-R1 128,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsDeepSeek-R1: Text · Qwen3 32B: Text
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightDeepSeek-R1Qwen3 32B
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%6464
Price25%4746
Inputs & features15%3535
Context window10%2424
Overall100%51/10051/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

DeepSeek-R1 vs Qwen3 32B specifications side by side
SpecificationDeepSeek-R1DeepSeekQwen3 32BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)139.0 (best)138.5
ECI rank#104 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$0.70
Output$2.60 (best)$2.80
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$1.18 (best)$1.23
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 11 providersOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window128,000 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Max output32,768 tokens (best)16,384 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpen
API model ID—qwen3-32b
API providers1214 (best)
ReleasedJan 20, 2025Apr 29, 2025
Knowledge cutoffJul 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
  • Qwen3 32B$12.60
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

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

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (DeepSeek-R1 51/100, Qwen3 32B 51/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: DeepSeek-R1 for raw capability and Qwen3 32B for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-R1 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). 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).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

DeepSeek-R1 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): DeepSeek-R1 139.0 (#104 of 148) and Qwen3 32B 138.5 (#106 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (136.2–140.4 vs 135.1–140.4), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — DeepSeek-R1 71.7%, Qwen3 32B 65.7%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — 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, DeepSeek-R1 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

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

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

DeepSeek-R1 accepts text; Qwen3 32B 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?

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

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons