Model comparison
DeepSeek-R1 vs Qwen3.5 Plus
DeepSeek-R1 and Qwen3.5 Plus score almost the same on the Noometry Index (42.3 vs 42.9), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 5 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeek
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 5 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek-R1 scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.5 Plus in 3 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.5 Plus leads 32.8 to 18.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 66.4% for DeepSeek-R1 and 86.7% for Qwen3.5 Plus.
- Both cost about the same: $0.50 input and $2.15 output per million tokens.
- Qwen3.5 Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 164K.
Side by side
| DeepSeek-R1 | Qwen3.5 Plus | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 42.3 | 42.9 |
| Released | 2025-01-20 | 2026-02-16 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 164K | 1M |
| Max output | 64K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.50 | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.15 | $2.40 |
| Results tracked | 52 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
DeepSeek-R1: 46.3 (#68), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| ALE-Bench | 804.12 | 621.92 |
| Aider Polyglot | 71.4% | — |
| SciCode | 35.7% | — |
| WeirdML | 41.6% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 66.7% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1427 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.7 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
DeepSeek-R1: 30.7 (#75), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| DeepResearch Bench | 35.1% | — |
| BALROG | 34.9% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 53.8% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 0.54 |
Reasoning Qwen3.5 Plus leads
DeepSeek-R1: 18.6 (#278), Qwen3.5 Plus: 32.8 (#74)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 141.29 | 146.78 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 1.3% | — |
| SimpleBench | 40.8% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 69.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 21.2% | — |
| CritPt | 1.1% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 22% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 83.2% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1416 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 17% |
| DTBench | — | 80.5% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 69.8% | — |
| LMCA | — | 36.4% |
| ForecastBench | 60 | — |
| LiveBench | 71.6% | — |
Math Qwen3.5 Plus leads
DeepSeek-R1: 43.8 (#79), Qwen3.5 Plus: 49.6 (#61)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 66.4% | 86.7% |
| Omni-MATH | 42.4% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 80.7% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1400 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 96.6% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 21% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 2.1% |
Knowledge Qwen3.5 Plus leads
DeepSeek-R1: 44.5 (#87), Qwen3.5 Plus: 46.0 (#83)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 76.3% | 84.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.3% | 10.7% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 25.4% |
| MMLU-Pro | 79.3% | — |
| Confabulations | 12.7% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 66.6% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1394 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
DeepSeek-R1: 52.4 (#85), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1412 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1442 | — |
| LMArena French | 1417 | — |
| LMArena German | 1404 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1391 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1360 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1423 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1411 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
DeepSeek-R1: 72.0 (#143), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 80.5% | — |
| IFEval | 78.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1382 | — |
Long Context DeepSeek-R1 leads
DeepSeek-R1: 45.4 (#36), Qwen3.5 Plus: 43.0 (#113)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 75% | — |
| CL-bench | — | 19.8% |
| CL-bench Life | — | 12.4% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1391 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
DeepSeek-R1: 61.4 (#88), Qwen3.5 Plus: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1428 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1405 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 83% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1500 | — |
| WildBench | 82.8% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1405 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 48.5% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek-R1 better than Qwen3.5 Plus?
DeepSeek-R1 and Qwen3.5 Plus score almost the same on the Noometry Index (42.3 vs 42.9), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-R1 or Qwen3.5 Plus?
Qwen3.5 Plus is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $2.40 per million output tokens; DeepSeek-R1 lists at $0.50 and $2.15.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.5 Plus does, with 1M tokens against 164K.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-R1 and Qwen3.5 Plus share?
5 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-R1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 Plus has 15.