ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

o3-pro vs DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B vs Claude Opus 4.1

Too close to call on our weighted score (o3-pro 68, Claude Opus 4.1 65, DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B 47). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. OpenAI

    o3-pro

    Released Jun 10, 2025

    68/100
    • ECI147.4
    • Price$20.00 / $80.00
    • Context200K
  2. DeepSeek

    DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B

    Released Jan 20, 2025

    47/100
    • ECI137.4
    • Price—
    • Context131K
  3. Anthropic

    Claude Opus 4.1

    Released Aug 5, 2025

    65/100
    • ECI144.1
    • Price$15.00 / $75.00
    • Context200K
01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 3 points (o3-pro 68/100, Claude Opus 4.1 65/100, DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B 47/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: o3-pro for raw capability and Claude Opus 4.1 on price. The score weighs capability 67%, inputs & features 20%, context window 13%.

  • Capabilityo3-proCapabilities Index (ECI): o3-pro 147.4 · Claude Opus 4.1 144.1 · DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B 137.4
  • Lowest priceClaude Opus 4.1Claude Opus 4.1 $30.00 · o3-pro $35.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B unpriced
  • Longest contexto3-pro and Claude Opus 4.1o3-pro 200,000 · Claude Opus 4.1 200,000 · DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsClaude Opus 4.1o3-pro: Text, Images · DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B: Text · Claude Opus 4.1: Text, Images, PDFs
  • Self-hostingDeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeighto3-proDeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32BClaude Opus 4.1
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)67%756271
Inputs & features20%701070
Context window13%322432
Overall100%68/10047/10065/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: price. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

o3-pro vs DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B vs Claude Opus 4.1 specifications side by side
Specificationo3-proOpenAIDeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32BDeepSeekClaude Opus 4.1Anthropic
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)147.4 (best)137.4144.1
ECI rank#60 of 148 (best)#110 of 148#81 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions—64.1%77.3% (best)
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics——12.6%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics—55.6%68.9% (best)
SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues——73.4%
Price per million tokens
Input$20.00—$15.00 (best)
Output$80.00—$75.00 (best)
Cached input———
Blended (3:1)$35.00—$30.00 (best)
Long-context rateSame rate—Same rate
Price sourceOfficial OpenAI API—Median of 14 providers
Limits
Context window200,000 tokens (best)131,072 tokens200,000 tokens (best)
Max output100,000 tokens (best)32,768 tokens32,000 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesNoYes
PDFsNoNoYes
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningYeslow · medium · highYesYes
Tool callingYesNoYes
Structured outputYesNoNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpenProprietary
API model IDo3-pro——
API providers6—14 (best)
ReleasedJun 10, 2025Jan 20, 2025Aug 5, 2025
Knowledge cutoffMay 2024—Mar 31, 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.

  • o3-pro$360.00
  • DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B—
  • Claude Opus 4.1$300.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: o3-pro, DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B or Claude Opus 4.1?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 3 points (o3-pro 68/100, Claude Opus 4.1 65/100, DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B 47/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: o3-pro for raw capability and Claude Opus 4.1 on price. The score weighs capability 67%, inputs & features 20%, context window 13%.

Which is cheaper, o3-pro, DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B or Claude Opus 4.1?

Claude Opus 4.1 is cheaper at $15.00 input / $75.00 output per million tokens (median across 14 API providers). o3-pro costs $20.00 input / $80.00 output per million tokens (official OpenAI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $30.00 per million tokens for Claude Opus 4.1 versus $35.00 for o3-pro (1.2× as much). DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B has no published per-token price.

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

o3-pro scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): o3-pro 147.4 (#60 of 148), Claude Opus 4.1 144.1 (#81 of 148) and DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B 137.4 (#110 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (145.8–149.7 vs 141.6–146.0), so treat the gap as small.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for o3-pro and DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, o3-pro leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Note that DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.

Which has the bigger context window?

o3-pro and Claude Opus 4.1 have the largest context windows (200,000 and 200,000 tokens), against 131,072 for DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B. Maximum output per response: o3-pro up to 100,000, DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B up to 32,768, Claude Opus 4.1 up to 32,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

o3-pro accepts text and images; DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B accepts text; Claude Opus 4.1 accepts text, images and PDFs. Claude Opus 4.1 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; o3-pro and Claude Opus 4.1 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Claude Opus 4.1 is the newest, released Aug 5, 2025. o3-pro came out Jun 10, 2025; DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B came out Jan 20, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: o3-pro May 2024, Claude Opus 4.1 Mar 31, 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.