ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3.6 Flash vs DeepSeek V3.2

Qwen3.6 Flash comes out ahead, 70 to 64 on our weighted score, though DeepSeek V3.2 is 19% cheaper per token.

  1. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.6 Flash

    Released Apr 27, 2026

    70/100
    • ECI143.3
    • Price$0.188 / $1.13
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.6 Flash

  2. DeepSeek

    DeepSeek V3.2

    Released Dec 1, 2025

    64/100
    • ECI146.3
    • Price$0.296 / $0.48
    • Context128K
    Full specs Remove DeepSeek V3.2

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Qwen3.6 Flash is our pick

Qwen3.6 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 70/100 against DeepSeek V3.2 (64). It leads on inputs & features and context window. DeepSeek V3.2 wins on capability and price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityDeepSeek V3.2Capabilities Index (ECI): DeepSeek V3.2 146.3 · Qwen3.6 Flash 143.3
  • Lowest priceDeepSeek V3.2DeepSeek V3.2 $0.342 · Qwen3.6 Flash $0.422 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3.6 FlashQwen3.6 Flash 1,000,000 · DeepSeek V3.2 128,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.6 FlashQwen3.6 Flash: Text, Images, Video · DeepSeek V3.2: Text
  • Self-hostingDeepSeek V3.2Publishes downloadable weights (MIT License)
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3.6 FlashDeepSeek V3.2
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%7073
Price25%6872
Inputs & features15%8045
Context window10%6024
Overall100%70/10064/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Qwen3.6 Flash vs DeepSeek V3.2 specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3.6 FlashAlibaba (Qwen)DeepSeek V3.2DeepSeek
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)143.3146.3 (best)
ECI rank#85 of 148#69 of 148 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions83.3%83.4% (best)
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics22.5%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics84.4%87.8% (best)
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions15.9%—
Price per million tokens
Input$0.188 (best)$0.296
Output$1.13$0.48 (best)
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$0.422$0.342 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Alibaba APIMedian of 15 providers
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens (best)128,000 tokens
Max output65,536 tokens (best)64,000 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoYesNo
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpenMIT License
API model IDqwen3.6-flash—
API providers16 (best)15
ReleasedApr 27, 2026Dec 1, 2025
Knowledge cutoff—Jul 2024
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.

  • Qwen3.6 Flash$4.13
  • DeepSeek V3.2$3.92
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3.6 Flash or DeepSeek V3.2?

Qwen3.6 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 70/100 against DeepSeek V3.2 (64). It leads on inputs & features and context window. DeepSeek V3.2 wins on capability and price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.6 Flash or DeepSeek V3.2?

DeepSeek V3.2 is cheaper at $0.296 input / $0.48 output per million tokens (median across 15 API providers). Qwen3.6 Flash costs $0.188 input / $1.13 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.342 per million tokens for DeepSeek V3.2 versus $0.422 for Qwen3.6 Flash (1.2× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

DeepSeek V3.2 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): DeepSeek V3.2 146.3 (#69 of 148) and Qwen3.6 Flash 143.3 (#85 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (144.4–147.5 vs 140.9–144.7), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — DeepSeek V3.2 83.4%, Qwen3.6 Flash 83.3%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — DeepSeek V3.2 87.8%, Qwen3.6 Flash 84.4%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3.6 Flash and DeepSeek V3.2 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, DeepSeek V3.2 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?

Qwen3.6 Flash has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 128,000 for DeepSeek V3.2. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.6 Flash up to 65,536, DeepSeek V3.2 up to 64,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3.6 Flash accepts text, images and video; DeepSeek V3.2 accepts text. Qwen3.6 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

DeepSeek V3.2 publishes its weights (MIT License) and can be self-hosted; Qwen3.6 Flash is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.6 Flash is the newest, released Apr 27, 2026. DeepSeek V3.2 came out Dec 1, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: DeepSeek V3.2 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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons