Model comparison
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale vs Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (39.7 vs 38.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeek
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale leads 32.9 to 25.9.
- DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 39.7 | 38.8 |
| Released | 2025-12-01 | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 128K | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.58 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.68 | — |
| Results tracked | 3 | 14 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale leads
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: 40.4 (#140), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 38.5 (#175)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 46.7% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1314 |
Reasoning DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale leads
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: 32.9 (#73), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 25.9 (#141)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 52.6% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1299 |
Math Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —, Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 36.1 (#174)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1298 |
Knowledge Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —, Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 35.5 (#183)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1289 |
Multilingual Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —, Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 41.9 (#201)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1265 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1314 |
| LMArena German | — | 1231 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1207 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1271 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —, Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.2 (#199)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1275 |
Long Context Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —, Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#184)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1292 |
Writing & Preference Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: 46.0 (#222), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.4 (#192)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1299 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1262 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1276 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1299 |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale better than Qwen2.5 Plus 1127?
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (39.7 vs 38.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale or Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better for coding?
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.4 versus 38.5 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale has 3 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14.