ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3 32B vs DeepSeek-R1 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash

Gemini 2.5 Flash comes out ahead, 68 to 51 and 51 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 32B

    Released Apr 29, 2025

    51/100
    • ECI138.5
    • Price$0.70 / $2.80
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3 32B

  2. DeepSeek

    DeepSeek-R1

    Released Jan 20, 2025

    51/100
    • ECI139.0
    • Price$0.70 / $2.60
    • Context128K
    Full specs Remove DeepSeek-R1
  3. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 2.5 Flash

    Released Jun 17, 2025

    68/100
    • ECI140.8
    • Price$0.30 / $2.50
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Gemini 2.5 Flash
01 — Verdict

Gemini 2.5 Flash is our pick

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against DeepSeek-R1 (51) and Qwen3 32B (51). It leads on capability, price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityGemini 2.5 FlashCapabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 2.5 Flash 140.8 · DeepSeek-R1 139.0 · Qwen3 32B 138.5
  • Lowest priceGemini 2.5 FlashGemini 2.5 Flash $0.85 · DeepSeek-R1 $1.18 · Qwen3 32B $1.23 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGemini 2.5 FlashGemini 2.5 Flash 1,048,576 · Qwen3 32B 131,072 · DeepSeek-R1 128,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 2.5 FlashQwen3 32B: Text · DeepSeek-R1: Text · Gemini 2.5 Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingQwen3 32B and DeepSeek-R1Publishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3 32BDeepSeek-R1Gemini 2.5 Flash
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%646467
Price25%464753
Inputs & features15%3535100
Context window10%242461
Overall100%51/10051/10068/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Qwen3 32B vs DeepSeek-R1 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3 32BAlibaba (Qwen)DeepSeek-R1DeepSeekGemini 2.5 FlashGoogle
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)138.5139.0140.8 (best)
ECI rank#106 of 148#104 of 148#97 of 148 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions65.7%71.7% (best)—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics66.9% (best)53.3%—
Price per million tokens
Input$0.70$0.70$0.30 (best)
Output$2.80$2.60$2.50 (best)
Cached input——$0.03
Blended (3:1)$1.23$1.18$0.85 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Alibaba APIMedian of 11 providersOfficial Google API
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens128,000 tokens1,048,576 tokens (best)
Max output16,384 tokens32,768 tokens65,536 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoNoYes
PDFsNoNoYes
AudioNoNoYes
VideoNoNoYes
ReasoningYesYesYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoNoYes
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenProprietary
API model IDqwen3-32b—gemini-2.5-flash
API providers141222 (best)
ReleasedApr 29, 2025Jan 20, 2025Jun 17, 2025
Knowledge cutoffApr 2025Jul 2024Jan 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.

  • Qwen3 32B$12.60
  • DeepSeek-R1$12.20
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash$8.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3 32B, DeepSeek-R1 or Gemini 2.5 Flash?

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against DeepSeek-R1 (51) and Qwen3 32B (51). It leads on capability, price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3 32B, DeepSeek-R1 or Gemini 2.5 Flash?

Gemini 2.5 Flash is cheaper at $0.30 input / $2.50 output per million tokens (official Google API price). DeepSeek-R1 costs $0.70 input / $2.60 output per million tokens (median across 11 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 $0.85 per million tokens for Gemini 2.5 Flash versus $1.18 for DeepSeek-R1 (1.4× as much) and $1.23 for Qwen3 32B (1.4× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Gemini 2.5 Flash scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 2.5 Flash 140.8 (#97 of 148), DeepSeek-R1 139.0 (#104 of 148) and Qwen3 32B 138.5 (#106 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (138.5–142.3 vs 136.2–140.4), so treat the gap as small.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3 32B, DeepSeek-R1 and Gemini 2.5 Flash yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Gemini 2.5 Flash leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.5 Flash has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3 32B and 128,000 for DeepSeek-R1. Maximum output per response: Qwen3 32B up to 16,384, DeepSeek-R1 up to 32,768, Gemini 2.5 Flash up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3 32B accepts text; DeepSeek-R1 accepts text; Gemini 2.5 Flash accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video. Gemini 2.5 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Qwen3 32B and DeepSeek-R1 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Gemini 2.5 Flash is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the newest, released Jun 17, 2025. Qwen3 32B came out Apr 29, 2025; DeepSeek-R1 came out Jan 20, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen3 32B Apr 2025, DeepSeek-R1 Jul 2024, Gemini 2.5 Flash Jan 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