Model comparison
DeepSeek-R1 vs Qwen3.5 Max Preview
Qwen3.5 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 42.3 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeek
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek-R1 scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen3.5 Max Preview in 4 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads 30.8 to 18.6.
Side by side
| DeepSeek-R1 | Qwen3.5 Max Preview | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 42.3 | 45.3 |
| Released | 2025-01-20 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 164K | — |
| Max output | 64K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.50 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.15 | — |
| Results tracked | 52 | 17 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding DeepSeek-R1 leads
DeepSeek-R1: 46.3 (#68), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 44.0 (#77)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1427 | 1487 |
| Aider Polyglot | 71.4% | — |
| SciCode | 35.7% | — |
| WeirdML | 41.6% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 66.7% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 804.12 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.7 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
DeepSeek-R1: 30.7 (#75), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| DeepResearch Bench | 35.1% | — |
| BALROG | 34.9% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 53.8% | — |
Reasoning Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
DeepSeek-R1: 18.6 (#278), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 30.8 (#84)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1416 | 1483 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 1.3% | — |
| SimpleBench | 40.8% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 69.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 21.2% | — |
| CritPt | 1.1% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 83.2% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 69.8% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 141.29 | — |
| ForecastBench | 60 | — |
| LiveBench | 71.6% | — |
Math DeepSeek-R1 leads
DeepSeek-R1: 43.8 (#79), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 40.1 (#94)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1400 | 1474 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 66.4% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 42.4% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 80.7% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 96.6% | — |
Knowledge DeepSeek-R1 leads
DeepSeek-R1: 44.5 (#87), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 41.8 (#107)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1394 | 1489 |
| GPQA Diamond | 76.3% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 79.3% | — |
| Confabulations | 12.7% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.3% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 66.6% | — |
Multilingual Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
DeepSeek-R1: 52.4 (#85), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 56.2 (#22)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1412 | 1465 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1442 | 1534 |
| LMArena French | 1417 | 1484 |
| LMArena German | 1404 | 1487 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1391 | 1495 |
| LMArena Korean | 1360 | 1438 |
| LMArena Russian | 1423 | 1471 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1411 | 1470 |
Instruction Following Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
DeepSeek-R1: 72.0 (#143), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 77.0 (#31)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1382 | 1467 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 80.5% | — |
| IFEval | 78.4% | — |
Long Context Too close to call
DeepSeek-R1: 45.4 (#36), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 45.2 (#45)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1391 | 1476 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 75% | — |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads
DeepSeek-R1: 61.4 (#88), Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 66.0 (#41)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1428 | 1470 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1405 | 1464 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1405 | 1478 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 83% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1500 | — |
| WildBench | 82.8% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 48.5% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek-R1 better than Qwen3.5 Max Preview?
Qwen3.5 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 42.3 on the Noometry Index.
Is DeepSeek-R1 or Qwen3.5 Max Preview better for coding?
DeepSeek-R1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.3 versus 44.0 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-R1 and Qwen3.5 Max Preview share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-R1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 Max Preview has 17.