ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 vs Qwen3.5 Flash

Too close to call on our weighted score (DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 76, Qwen3.5 Flash 75). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. DeepSeek

    DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731

    Released Jul 31, 2026

    76/100
    • ECI154.5
    • Price$0.14 / $0.28
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731

  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.5 Flash

    Released Feb 23, 2026

    75/100
    • ECI144.0
    • Price$0.10 / $0.40
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.5 Flash

  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 1 points (DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 76/100, Qwen3.5 Flash 75/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 for raw capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityDeepSeek V4 Flash 0731Capabilities Index (ECI): DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 154.5 · Qwen3.5 Flash 144.0
  • Lowest priceSame priceDeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 $0.175 · Qwen3.5 Flash $0.175 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextAbout the sameDeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 1,000,000 · Qwen3.5 Flash 1,000,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.5 FlashDeepSeek V4 Flash 0731: Text · Qwen3.5 Flash: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingDeepSeek V4 Flash 0731Publishes downloadable weights (MIT)
How the score is built
MeasureWeightDeepSeek V4 Flash 0731Qwen3.5 Flash
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%8471
Price25%8686
Inputs & features15%4580
Context window10%6060
Overall100%76/10075/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 vs Qwen3.5 Flash specifications side by side
SpecificationDeepSeek V4 Flash 0731DeepSeekQwen3.5 FlashAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)154.5 (best)144.0
ECI rank#32 of 148 (best)#82 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions91.0% (best)82.3%
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics57.5% (best)18.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics94.4% (best)84.4%
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions33.6% (best)20.3%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.14$0.10 (best)
Output$0.28 (best)$0.40
Cached input—$0.01
Blended (3:1)$0.175$0.175
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 48 providersOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens1,000,000 tokens
Max output384,000 tokens (best)65,536 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoYes
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoYes
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesYes
Availability
WeightsOpenMITProprietary
API model ID—qwen3.5-flash
API providers49 (best)8
ReleasedJul 31, 2026Feb 23, 2026
Knowledge cutoffMay 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 V4 Flash 0731$1.96
  • Qwen3.5 Flash$1.80
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 or Qwen3.5 Flash?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 1 points (DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 76/100, Qwen3.5 Flash 75/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 for raw capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 or Qwen3.5 Flash?

DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 and Qwen3.5 Flash cost the same: $0.14 input / $0.28 output per million tokens.

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 154.5 (#32 of 148) and Qwen3.5 Flash 144.0 (#82 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (152.0–156.6 vs 141.6–145.5), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 91.0%, Qwen3.5 Flash 82.3%; FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 57.5%, Qwen3.5 Flash 18.3%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 94.4%, Qwen3.5 Flash 84.4%; SimpleQA Verified — DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 33.6%, Qwen3.5 Flash 20.3%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 and Qwen3.5 Flash yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 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 V4 Flash 0731 and Qwen3.5 Flash share the same 1,000,000-token context window. Maximum output per response: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 up to 384,000, Qwen3.5 Flash up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 accepts text; Qwen3.5 Flash accepts text, images and video. Qwen3.5 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 publishes its weights (MIT) and can be self-hosted; Qwen3.5 Flash is proprietary.

Which is newer?

DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 is the newest, released Jul 31, 2026. Qwen3.5 Flash came out Feb 23, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 May 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