Model comparison

DeepSeek V4 Flash vs Qwen3 32B

DeepSeek V4 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.6 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified October 12, 2026. 22 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek V4 Flash

DeepSeek

53.6

Rank #35 Confirmed

Qwen3 32B

Alibaba (Qwen)

39.2

Rank #172 Confirmed

Summary

They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek V4 Flash scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen3 32B in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in reasoning, where DeepSeek V4 Flash leads 53.7 to 20.2.
The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 33% for DeepSeek V4 Flash and 5% for Qwen3 32B.
DeepSeek V4 Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen3 32B.
DeepSeek V4 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.

Side by side

DeepSeek V4 Flash and Qwen3 32B specifications
	DeepSeek V4 Flash	Qwen3 32B
Provider	DeepSeek	Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index	53.6	39.2
Released	2026-04-24	2025-04
Weights	Open	Open
Context window	1M	131K
Max output	393K	16K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.15	$0.70
Output $ / M tokens	$0.60	$2.80
Results tracked	41	26

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding DeepSeek V4 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4 Flash: 47.9 (#59), Qwen3 32B: 37.7 (#190)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Flash	Qwen3 32B
SciCode	49.9%	35.4%
LMArena Coding	1457	1358
FrontierCode	18.8%	—
Aider Polyglot	—	40%
LMArena WebDev	1582	—
WeirdML	63%	—
ALE-Bench	1,306	—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

DeepSeek V4 Flash: —, Qwen3 32B: 32.6 (#62)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Flash	Qwen3 32B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard	—	48.7%

Reasoning DeepSeek V4 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4 Flash: 53.7 (#30), Qwen3 32B: 20.2 (#241)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Flash	Qwen3 32B
Kagi LLM Benchmark	52.2%	54.9%
CritPt	16.6%	0.3%
Chess Puzzles	33%	5%
LMArena Hard Prompts	1444	1334
DTBench	90.9%	67.5%
LMCA	41.7%	17.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index	154.49	138.51
ARC-AGI-2	61.4%	—
SimpleBench	61.1%	—
NYT Connections (extended)	89.6%	—
ARC-AGI-1	89%	—
Mystery Game Puzzles	34%	—

Math DeepSeek V4 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4 Flash: 60.3 (#37), Qwen3 32B: 39.7 (#99)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Flash	Qwen3 32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	94.4%	66.9%
LMArena Math	1427	1399
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)	57.5%	—
FrontierMath Tier 4	24.4%	—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions	76.5%	—
ProofBench	56%	—

Knowledge DeepSeek V4 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4 Flash: 55.4 (#48), Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#125)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Flash	Qwen3 32B
GPQA Diamond	91%	65.7%
LMArena Expert	1441	1362
SimpleQA Verified	33.6%	—
Vectara Hallucination Rate	—	5.9%

Multilingual DeepSeek V4 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4 Flash: 53.0 (#72), Qwen3 32B: 45.6 (#167)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Flash	Qwen3 32B
LMArena Non-English	1420	1317
LMArena Chinese	1468	1357
LMArena German	1418	1341
LMArena Russian	1428	1311
LMArena French	1439	—
LMArena Japanese	1406	—
LMArena Korean	1384	—
LMArena Spanish	1436	—

Instruction Following DeepSeek V4 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4 Flash: 74.9 (#81), Qwen3 32B: 68.9 (#179)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Flash	Qwen3 32B
LMArena Instruction Following	1421	1305

Long Context Too close to call

DeepSeek V4 Flash: 43.8 (#85), Qwen3 32B: 43.8 (#87)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Flash	Qwen3 32B
LMArena Longer Query	1434	1327
Fiction.LiveBench	—	74.2%

Writing & Preference DeepSeek V4 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4 Flash: 63.8 (#61), Qwen3 32B: 52.9 (#163)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Flash	Qwen3 32B
LMArena Text	1432	1340
LMArena Creative Writing	1403	1297
LMArena Multi-Turn	1449	1331
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	1559	—

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek V4 Flash better than Qwen3 32B?

DeepSeek V4 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.6 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4 Flash or Qwen3 32B?

DeepSeek V4 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Qwen3 32B lists at $0.70 and $2.80.

Is DeepSeek V4 Flash or Qwen3 32B better for coding?

DeepSeek V4 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.9 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

DeepSeek V4 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek V4 Flash and Qwen3 32B share?

22 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek V4 Flash has 41 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.