ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Qwen3 30B A3B vs DeepSeek R1 0528

Qwen3 30B A3B comes out ahead, 57 to 53 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 30B A3B

    Released Apr 28, 2025

    57/100
    • ECI136.2
    • Price$0.108 / $0.475
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3 30B A3B

  2. DeepSeek

    DeepSeek R1 0528

    Released May 28, 2025

    53/100
    • ECI141.2
    • Price$0.512 / $2.19
    • Context164K
    Full specs Remove DeepSeek R1 0528

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Qwen3 30B A3B is our pick

Qwen3 30B A3B is the better all-round choice, scoring 57/100 against DeepSeek R1 0528 (53). It leads on price. DeepSeek R1 0528 wins on capability and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityDeepSeek R1 0528Capabilities Index (ECI): DeepSeek R1 0528 141.2 · Qwen3 30B A3B 136.2
  • Lowest priceQwen3 30B A3BQwen3 30B A3B $0.20 · DeepSeek R1 0528 $0.932 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextDeepSeek R1 0528DeepSeek R1 0528 163,840 · Qwen3 30B A3B 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsQwen3 30B A3B: Text · DeepSeek R1 0528: Text
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3 30B A3BDeepSeek R1 0528
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%5966
Price25%8049
Inputs & features15%3535
Context window10%2528
Overall100%57/10053/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Qwen3 30B A3B vs DeepSeek R1 0528 specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3 30B A3BAlibaba (Qwen)DeepSeek R1 0528DeepSeek
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)136.2141.2 (best)
ECI rank#126 of 165#108 of 165 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions61.7%76.3% (best)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics62.8%66.4% (best)
Price per million tokens
Input$0.108 (best)$0.512
Output$0.475 (best)$2.19
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$0.20 (best)$0.932
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 14 providersMedian of 16 providers
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens163,840 tokens (best)
Max output16,384 tokens32,768 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenMIT
API model ID——
API providers1416 (best)
ReleasedApr 28, 2025May 28, 2025
Knowledge cutoff——
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.

  • Qwen3 30B A3B$2.03
  • DeepSeek R1 0528$9.50
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3 30B A3B or DeepSeek R1 0528?

Qwen3 30B A3B is the better all-round choice, scoring 57/100 against DeepSeek R1 0528 (53). It leads on price. DeepSeek R1 0528 wins on capability and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3 30B A3B or DeepSeek R1 0528?

Qwen3 30B A3B is cheaper at $0.108 input / $0.475 output per million tokens (median across 14 API providers). DeepSeek R1 0528 costs $0.512 input / $2.19 output per million tokens (median across 16 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.20 per million tokens for Qwen3 30B A3B versus $0.932 for DeepSeek R1 0528 (4.7× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

DeepSeek R1 0528 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): DeepSeek R1 0528 141.2 (#108 of 165) and Qwen3 30B A3B 136.2 (#126 of 165). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (139.0–142.9 vs 130.8–138.5), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — DeepSeek R1 0528 76.3%, Qwen3 30B A3B 61.7%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — DeepSeek R1 0528 66.4%, Qwen3 30B A3B 62.8%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3 30B A3B and DeepSeek R1 0528 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, DeepSeek R1 0528 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 R1 0528 has the largest context window at 163,840 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3 30B A3B. Maximum output per response: Qwen3 30B A3B up to 16,384, DeepSeek R1 0528 up to 32,768 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3 30B A3B accepts text; DeepSeek R1 0528 accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

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

Which is newer?

DeepSeek R1 0528 is the newest, released May 28, 2025. Qwen3 30B A3B came out Apr 28, 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 Nov 2, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons