ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

DeepSeek-V3.1 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Qwen3 235B-A22B

Gemini 2.5 Flash comes out ahead, 68 to 55 and 51 on our weighted score, though DeepSeek-V3.1 is 29% cheaper per token.

  1. DeepSeek

    DeepSeek-V3.1

    Released Aug 21, 2025

    55/100
    • ECI139.9
    • Price$0.385 / $1.25
    • Context131K
  2. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 2.5 Flash

    Released Jun 17, 2025

    68/100
    • ECI140.8
    • Price$0.30 / $2.50
    • Context1.05M
  3. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 235B-A22B

    Released Apr 28, 2025

    51/100
    • ECI139.4
    • Price$0.70 / $2.80
    • Context131K
01 — Verdict

Gemini 2.5 Flash is our pick

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against DeepSeek-V3.1 (55) and Qwen3 235B-A22B (51). It leads on inputs & features and context window. DeepSeek-V3.1 wins on price. 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-V3.1 139.9 · Qwen3 235B-A22B 139.4
  • Lowest priceDeepSeek-V3.1DeepSeek-V3.1 $0.601 · Gemini 2.5 Flash $0.85 · Qwen3 235B-A22B $1.23 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGemini 2.5 FlashGemini 2.5 Flash 1,048,576 · DeepSeek-V3.1 131,072 · Qwen3 235B-A22B 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 2.5 FlashDeepSeek-V3.1: Text · Gemini 2.5 Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · Qwen3 235B-A22B: Text
  • Self-hostingDeepSeek-V3.1 and Qwen3 235B-A22BPublishes downloadable weights (MIT License)
How the score is built
MeasureWeightDeepSeek-V3.1Gemini 2.5 FlashQwen3 235B-A22B
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%656765
Price25%605346
Inputs & features15%3510035
Context window10%246124
Overall100%55/10068/10051/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

DeepSeek-V3.1 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Qwen3 235B-A22B specifications side by side
SpecificationDeepSeek-V3.1DeepSeekGemini 2.5 FlashGoogleQwen3 235B-A22BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)139.9140.8 (best)139.4
ECI rank#100 of 148#97 of 148 (best)#103 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions——70.7%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.385$0.30 (best)$0.70
Output$1.25 (best)$2.50$2.80
Cached input—$0.03—
Blended (3:1)$0.601 (best)$0.85$1.23
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 8 providersOfficial Google APIOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens1,048,576 tokens (best)131,072 tokens
Max output8,192 tokens65,536 tokens (best)16,384 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoYesNo
PDFsNoYesNo
AudioNoYesNo
VideoNoYesNo
ReasoningYesYesYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoYesNo
Availability
WeightsOpenMIT LicenseProprietaryOpen
API model ID—gemini-2.5-flashqwen3-235b-a22b
API providers822 (best)7
ReleasedAug 21, 2025Jun 17, 2025Apr 28, 2025
Knowledge cutoff—Jan 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-V3.1$6.35
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash$8.00
  • Qwen3 235B-A22B$12.60
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: DeepSeek-V3.1, Gemini 2.5 Flash or Qwen3 235B-A22B?

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against DeepSeek-V3.1 (55) and Qwen3 235B-A22B (51). It leads on inputs & features and context window. DeepSeek-V3.1 wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-V3.1, Gemini 2.5 Flash or Qwen3 235B-A22B?

DeepSeek-V3.1 is cheaper at $0.385 input / $1.25 output per million tokens (median across 8 API providers). Gemini 2.5 Flash costs $0.30 input / $2.50 output per million tokens (official Google API price); Qwen3 235B-A22B 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 $0.601 per million tokens for DeepSeek-V3.1 versus $0.85 for Gemini 2.5 Flash (1.4× as much) and $1.23 for Qwen3 235B-A22B (2× 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-V3.1 139.9 (#100 of 148) and Qwen3 235B-A22B 139.4 (#103 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (138.5–142.3 vs 136.1–143.3), so treat the gap as small.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for DeepSeek-V3.1, Gemini 2.5 Flash and Qwen3 235B-A22B 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 DeepSeek-V3.1 and 131,072 for Qwen3 235B-A22B. Maximum output per response: DeepSeek-V3.1 up to 8,192, Gemini 2.5 Flash up to 65,536, Qwen3 235B-A22B up to 16,384 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

DeepSeek-V3.1 accepts text; Gemini 2.5 Flash accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; Qwen3 235B-A22B accepts text. Gemini 2.5 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

DeepSeek-V3.1 and Qwen3 235B-A22B publishes its weights (MIT License) and can be self-hosted; Gemini 2.5 Flash is proprietary.

Which is newer?

DeepSeek-V3.1 is the newest, released Aug 21, 2025. Gemini 2.5 Flash came out Jun 17, 2025; Qwen3 235B-A22B came out Apr 28, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini 2.5 Flash Jan 2025, Qwen3 235B-A22B 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.