DeepSeek-V3.1 vs Qwen3 32B
DeepSeek-V3.1 comes out ahead, 55 to 51 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V3.1
55/100- ECI139.9
- Price$0.385 / $1.25
- Context131K
Alibaba (Qwen)
Qwen3 32B
51/100- ECI138.5
- Price$0.70 / $2.80
- Context131K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
DeepSeek-V3.1 is our pick
DeepSeek-V3.1 is the better all-round choice, scoring 55/100 against Qwen3 32B (51). It leads on capability and price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityDeepSeek-V3.1Capabilities Index (ECI): DeepSeek-V3.1 139.9 · Qwen3 32B 138.5
- Lowest priceDeepSeek-V3.1DeepSeek-V3.1 $0.601 · Qwen3 32B $1.23 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextAbout the sameDeepSeek-V3.1 131,072 · Qwen3 32B 131,072 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsDeepSeek-V3.1: Text · Qwen3 32B: Text
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | DeepSeek-V3.1 | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 65 | 64 |
| Price | 25% | 60 | 46 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 35 | 35 |
| Context window | 10% | 24 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 55/100 | 51/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 139.9 (best) | 138.5 |
| ECI rank | #100 of 148 (best) | #106 of 148 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | — | 65.7% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | — | 66.9% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.385 (best) | $0.70 |
| Output | $1.25 (best) | $2.80 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.601 (best) | $1.23 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 8 providers | Official Alibaba API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 131,072 tokens | 131,072 tokens |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 16,384 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | OpenMIT License | Open |
| API model ID | — | qwen3-32b |
| API providers | 8 | 14 (best) |
| Released | Aug 21, 2025 | Apr 29, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Apr 2025 |
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
Qwen3 32B$12.60
Which should you choose?
Which is better: DeepSeek-V3.1 or Qwen3 32B?
DeepSeek-V3.1 is the better all-round choice, scoring 55/100 against Qwen3 32B (51). It leads on capability and price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-V3.1 or Qwen3 32B?
DeepSeek-V3.1 is cheaper at $0.385 input / $1.25 output per million tokens (median across 8 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 $0.601 per million tokens for DeepSeek-V3.1 versus $1.23 for Qwen3 32B (2× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
DeepSeek-V3.1 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): DeepSeek-V3.1 139.9 (#100 of 148) and Qwen3 32B 138.5 (#106 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (136.1–143.3 vs 135.1–140.4), so treat the gap as small.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for DeepSeek-V3.1 and Qwen3 32B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, DeepSeek-V3.1 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?
DeepSeek-V3.1 and Qwen3 32B share the same 131,072-token context window. Maximum output per response: DeepSeek-V3.1 up to 8,192, Qwen3 32B up to 16,384 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
DeepSeek-V3.1 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 (MIT License), so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
DeepSeek-V3.1 is the newest, released Aug 21, 2025. Qwen3 32B came out Apr 29, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: 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.