Model comparison
DeepSeek V4 Pro vs Qwen Turbo
DeepSeek V4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.3 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 11× less per token, which makes it the better buy when DeepSeek V4 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeek
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek V4 Pro scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen Turbo in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where DeepSeek V4 Pro leads 64.8 to 15.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 98.6% for DeepSeek V4 Pro and 6.1% for Qwen Turbo.
- Qwen Turbo is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.66 / $1.98 for DeepSeek V4 Pro.
- DeepSeek V4 Pro has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| DeepSeek V4 Pro | Qwen Turbo | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 54.3 | 27.1 |
| Released | 2026-04-24 | 2024-11-01 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| Max output | 393K | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.66 | $0.05 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.98 | $0.20 |
| Results tracked | 48 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
DeepSeek V4 Pro: 52.4 (#34), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 77.6% | — |
| FrontierCode | 28.6% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1582 | — |
| SciCode | 51% | — |
| WeirdML | 66.2% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1470 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,403 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
DeepSeek V4 Pro: 32.8 (#58), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 47.3% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 3,285 | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
DeepSeek V4 Pro: 56.5 (#24), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 61.3% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 53.5% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 91.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 90.5% | — |
| CritPt | 18% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 47% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1461 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 43% | — |
| DTBench | 93.9% | — |
| LMCA | 45.5% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 40% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155.31 | — |
| ForecastBench | 56.1 | — |
Math DeepSeek V4 Pro leads
DeepSeek V4 Pro: 64.8 (#30), Qwen Turbo: 15.3 (#297)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.6% | 6.1% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 64.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 26.8% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 76.6% | — |
| ProofBench | 50% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1455 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 56.2% |
Knowledge DeepSeek V4 Pro leads
DeepSeek V4 Pro: 59.5 (#31), Qwen Turbo: 22.2 (#272)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 91.7% | 41.8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 52.9% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 8.6% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1464 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
DeepSeek V4 Pro: 54.4 (#45), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1439 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1486 | — |
| LMArena French | 1472 | — |
| LMArena German | 1458 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1445 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1447 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1453 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1458 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
DeepSeek V4 Pro: 76.1 (#47), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1448 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
DeepSeek V4 Pro: 45.0 (#51), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| CL-bench Life | 13.5% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1458 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
DeepSeek V4 Pro: 65.5 (#46), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1451 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1446 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1553 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1166 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1467 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek V4 Pro better than Qwen Turbo?
DeepSeek V4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.3 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 11× less per token, which makes it the better buy when DeepSeek V4 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4 Pro or Qwen Turbo?
Qwen Turbo is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; DeepSeek V4 Pro lists at $0.66 and $1.98.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both accept 1M tokens.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek V4 Pro and Qwen Turbo share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek V4 Pro has 48 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Turbo has 3.