ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

DeepSeek-V3.1 vs GPT OSS 120B vs Qwen3 14B

GPT OSS 120B comes out ahead, 61 to 55 and 54 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. DeepSeek

    DeepSeek-V3.1

    Released Aug 21, 2025

    55/100
    • ECI139.9
    • Price$0.385 / $1.25
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove DeepSeek-V3.1
  2. Our pick

    OpenAI

    GPT OSS 120B

    Released Aug 5, 2025

    61/100
    • ECI140.0
    • Price$0.15 / $0.60
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove GPT OSS 120B

  3. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 14B

    Released Apr 29, 2025

    54/100
    • ECI138.2
    • Price$0.35 / $1.40
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3 14B
01 — Verdict

GPT OSS 120B is our pick

GPT OSS 120B is the better all-round choice, scoring 61/100 against DeepSeek-V3.1 (55) and Qwen3 14B (54). It leads on price and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityGPT OSS 120BCapabilities Index (ECI): GPT OSS 120B 140.0 · DeepSeek-V3.1 139.9 · Qwen3 14B 138.2
  • Lowest priceGPT OSS 120BGPT OSS 120B $0.263 · DeepSeek-V3.1 $0.601 · Qwen3 14B $0.613 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextAbout the sameDeepSeek-V3.1 131,072 · GPT OSS 120B 131,072 · Qwen3 14B 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsDeepSeek-V3.1: Text · GPT OSS 120B: Text · Qwen3 14B: Text
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightDeepSeek-V3.1GPT OSS 120BQwen3 14B
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%656563
Price25%607760
Inputs & features15%354535
Context window10%242424
Overall100%55/10061/10054/100
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 GPT OSS 120B vs Qwen3 14B specifications side by side
SpecificationDeepSeek-V3.1DeepSeekGPT OSS 120BOpenAIQwen3 14BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)139.9140.0 (best)138.2
ECI rank#100 of 148#99 of 148 (best)#107 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions—75.8% (best)63.8%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics—88.9% (best)66.4%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.385$0.15 (best)$0.35
Output$1.25$0.60 (best)$1.40
Cached input———
Blended (3:1)$0.601$0.263 (best)$0.613
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 8 providersMedian of 36 providersOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens131,072 tokens131,072 tokens
Max output8,192 tokens32,768 tokens (best)8,192 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoNoNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningYesYesYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoYesNo
Availability
WeightsOpenMIT LicenseOpenOpen
API model ID——qwen3-14b
API providers839 (best)1
ReleasedAug 21, 2025Aug 5, 2025Apr 29, 2025
Knowledge cutoff——Apr 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
  • GPT OSS 120B$2.70
  • Qwen3 14B$6.30
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: DeepSeek-V3.1, GPT OSS 120B or Qwen3 14B?

GPT OSS 120B is the better all-round choice, scoring 61/100 against DeepSeek-V3.1 (55) and Qwen3 14B (54). It leads on price and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-V3.1, GPT OSS 120B or Qwen3 14B?

GPT OSS 120B is cheaper at $0.15 input / $0.60 output per million tokens (median across 36 API providers). DeepSeek-V3.1 costs $0.385 input / $1.25 output per million tokens (median across 8 API providers); Qwen3 14B costs $0.35 input / $1.40 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.263 per million tokens for GPT OSS 120B versus $0.601 for DeepSeek-V3.1 (2.3× as much) and $0.613 for Qwen3 14B (2.3× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

GPT OSS 120B scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): GPT OSS 120B 140.0 (#99 of 148), DeepSeek-V3.1 139.9 (#100 of 148) and Qwen3 14B 138.2 (#107 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (135.3–142.3 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, GPT OSS 120B and Qwen3 14B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, GPT OSS 120B 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?

DeepSeek-V3.1, GPT OSS 120B and Qwen3 14B share the same 131,072-token context window. Maximum output per response: DeepSeek-V3.1 up to 8,192, GPT OSS 120B up to 32,768, Qwen3 14B up to 8,192 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

DeepSeek-V3.1 accepts text; GPT OSS 120B accepts text; Qwen3 14B accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, all three publish their weights (MIT License), so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

DeepSeek-V3.1 is the newest, released Aug 21, 2025. GPT OSS 120B came out Aug 5, 2025; Qwen3 14B came out Apr 29, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen3 14B 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