Qwen3 30B A3B vs DeepSeek-R1
Qwen3 30B A3B comes out ahead, 58 to 51 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3 30B A3B
58/100- ECI136.2
- Price$0.114 / $0.50
- Context131K
DeepSeekDeepSeek-R1
51/100- ECI139.0
- Price$0.70 / $2.60
- Context128K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Qwen3 30B A3B is our pick
Qwen3 30B A3B is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against DeepSeek-R1 (51). It leads on price. DeepSeek-R1 wins on capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityDeepSeek-R1Capabilities Index (ECI): DeepSeek-R1 139.0 · Qwen3 30B A3B 136.2
- Lowest priceQwen3 30B A3BQwen3 30B A3B $0.21 · DeepSeek-R1 $1.18 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen3 30B A3BQwen3 30B A3B 131,072 · DeepSeek-R1 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsQwen3 30B A3B: Text · DeepSeek-R1: Text
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | Qwen3 30B A3B | DeepSeek-R1 |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 61 | 64 |
| Price | 25% | 82 | 47 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 35 | 35 |
| Context window | 10% | 24 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 58/100 | 51/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Qwen3 30B A3BAlibaba (Qwen) | DeepSeek-R1DeepSeek |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 136.2 | 139.0 (best) |
| ECI rank | #112 of 148 | #104 of 148 (best) |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 61.7% | 71.7% (best) |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 62.8% (best) | 53.3% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.114 (best) | $0.70 |
| Output | $0.50 (best) | $2.60 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.21 (best) | $1.18 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 8 providers | Median of 11 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 131,072 tokens (best) | 128,000 tokens |
| Max output | 16,384 tokens | 32,768 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 | Open | Open |
| API model ID | — | — |
| API providers | 8 | 12 (best) |
| Released | Apr 28, 2025 | Jan 20, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Jul 2024 |
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$2.14
- DeepSeek-R1$12.20
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen3 30B A3B or DeepSeek-R1?
Qwen3 30B A3B is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against DeepSeek-R1 (51). It leads on price. DeepSeek-R1 wins on capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3 30B A3B or DeepSeek-R1?
Qwen3 30B A3B is cheaper at $0.114 input / $0.50 output per million tokens (median across 8 API providers). DeepSeek-R1 costs $0.70 input / $2.60 output per million tokens (median across 11 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.21 per million tokens for Qwen3 30B A3B versus $1.18 for DeepSeek-R1 (5.6× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
DeepSeek-R1 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): DeepSeek-R1 139.0 (#104 of 148) and Qwen3 30B A3B 136.2 (#112 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (136.2–140.4 vs 130.3–138.7), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — DeepSeek-R1 71.7%, Qwen3 30B A3B 61.7%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3 30B A3B 62.8%, DeepSeek-R1 53.3%.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3 30B A3B and DeepSeek-R1 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, DeepSeek-R1 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?
Qwen3 30B A3B has the largest context window at 131,072 tokens, against 128,000 for DeepSeek-R1. Maximum output per response: Qwen3 30B A3B up to 16,384, DeepSeek-R1 up to 32,768 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen3 30B A3B accepts text; DeepSeek-R1 accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, both publish their weights, so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
Qwen3 30B A3B is the newest, released Apr 28, 2025. DeepSeek-R1 came out Jan 20, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: DeepSeek-R1 Jul 2024.
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.
Related comparisons
- Add Gemini 2.5 Flash-LiteThree-way comparison
- Qwen3 30B A3B vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGoogle · ECI 133.9
- Qwen3 30B A3B vs DeepSeek V3 0324DeepSeek · ECI 135.9
- Qwen3 30B A3B vs GPT OSS 20BOpenAI · ECI 137.8
- Qwen3 30B A3B vs Mistral Small 3.2Mistral AI · ECI 131.7
- DeepSeek-R1 vs Qwen3 235B-A22BAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 139.4
- DeepSeek-R1 vs Gemini 2.5 FlashGoogle · ECI 140.8
