Qwen3 32B vs QwQ 32B vs DeepSeek-R1
Too close to call on our weighted score (QwQ 32B 53, DeepSeek-R1 51, Qwen3 32B 51). The right pick depends on what you value most.
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3 32B
51/100- ECI138.5
- Price$0.70 / $2.80
- Context131K
- Alibaba (Qwen)
QwQ 32B
53/100- ECI137.6
- Price$0.66 / $1.00
- Context131K
DeepSeekDeepSeek-R1
51/100- ECI139.0
- Price$0.70 / $2.60
- Context128K
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (QwQ 32B 53/100, DeepSeek-R1 51/100, Qwen3 32B 51/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: DeepSeek-R1 for raw capability and QwQ 32B on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityDeepSeek-R1Capabilities Index (ECI): DeepSeek-R1 139.0 · Qwen3 32B 138.5 · QwQ 32B 137.6
- Lowest priceQwQ 32BQwQ 32B $0.745 · DeepSeek-R1 $1.18 · Qwen3 32B $1.23 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen3 32B and QwQ 32BQwen3 32B 131,072 · QwQ 32B 131,072 · DeepSeek-R1 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsQwen3 32B: Text · QwQ 32B: Text · DeepSeek-R1: Text
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | Qwen3 32B | QwQ 32B | DeepSeek-R1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 64 | 62 | 64 |
| Price | 25% | 46 | 56 | 47 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 35 | 35 | 35 |
| Context window | 10% | 24 | 24 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 51/100 | 53/100 | 51/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Qwen3 32BAlibaba (Qwen) | QwQ 32BAlibaba (Qwen) | DeepSeek-R1DeepSeek |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 138.5 | 137.6 | 139.0 (best) |
| ECI rank | #106 of 148 | #109 of 148 | #104 of 148 (best) |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 65.7% | 65.3% | 71.7% (best) |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 66.9% (best) | 59.2% | 53.3% |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.70 | $0.66 (best) | $0.70 |
| Output | $2.80 | $1.00 (best) | $2.60 |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.23 | $0.745 (best) | $1.18 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Alibaba API | Median of 1 providers | Median of 11 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 131,072 tokens (best) | 131,072 tokens (best) | 128,000 tokens |
| Max output | 16,384 tokens | 8,192 tokens | 32,768 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | Open | Open |
| API model ID | qwen3-32b | — | — |
| API providers | 14 (best) | 1 | 12 |
| Released | Apr 29, 2025 | Mar 5, 2025 | Jan 20, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Apr 2025 | Apr 2024 | 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 32B$12.60
- QwQ 32B$8.60
- DeepSeek-R1$12.20
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen3 32B, QwQ 32B or DeepSeek-R1?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (QwQ 32B 53/100, DeepSeek-R1 51/100, Qwen3 32B 51/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: DeepSeek-R1 for raw capability and QwQ 32B on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3 32B, QwQ 32B or DeepSeek-R1?
QwQ 32B is cheaper at $0.66 input / $1.00 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). 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 $0.745 per million tokens for QwQ 32B versus $1.18 for DeepSeek-R1 (1.6× as much) and $1.23 for Qwen3 32B (1.6× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
DeepSeek-R1 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): DeepSeek-R1 139.0 (#104 of 148), Qwen3 32B 138.5 (#106 of 148) and QwQ 32B 137.6 (#109 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (136.2–140.4 vs 135.1–140.4), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — DeepSeek-R1 71.7%, Qwen3 32B 65.7%, QwQ 32B 65.3%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3 32B 66.9%, QwQ 32B 59.2%, DeepSeek-R1 53.3%.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3 32B, QwQ 32B 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. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3 32B and QwQ 32B have the largest context windows (131,072 and 131,072 tokens), against 128,000 for DeepSeek-R1. Maximum output per response: Qwen3 32B up to 16,384, QwQ 32B up to 8,192, DeepSeek-R1 up to 32,768 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen3 32B accepts text; QwQ 32B accepts text; DeepSeek-R1 accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, all three publish their weights, so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
Qwen3 32B is the newest, released Apr 29, 2025. QwQ 32B came out Mar 5, 2025; DeepSeek-R1 came out Jan 20, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen3 32B Apr 2025, QwQ 32B Apr 2024, 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.
