Model comparison
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B vs QwQ-32B
QwQ-32B has enough public results to be ranked (#159); DeepSeek Coder 1.3B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeek
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek Coder 1.3B scores higher in 0 categories and QwQ-32B in 1 category; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where QwQ-32B leads 35.4 to 31.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 29.6% for DeepSeek Coder 1.3B and 54.4% for QwQ-32B.
Side by side
| DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | QwQ-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 35.0 | 39.8 |
| Released | 2023-11-02 | 2024-11-28 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 9 | 36 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding QwQ-32B leads
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: 31.2 (#287), QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 22.8% | 44.6% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 29.6% | 54.4% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 20.9% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 72.2% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1333 |
| HumanEval+ | 60.4% | — |
| MBPP+ | 54.8% | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 63.6 | 137.6 |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 83.5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1325 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65% |
| ForecastBench | — | 58.3 |
| LiveBench | — | 72% |
| WinoGrande | 53.3% | — |
Math Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 59.2% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 77.8% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1359 |
| GSM8K | 4.4% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.3% |
| Confabulations | — | 15.6% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1324 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 25.4% | — |
| MMLU | 25.8% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1305 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1378 |
| LMArena French | — | 1336 |
| LMArena German | — | 1313 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1262 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1279 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1297 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1354 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.8% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1297 |
Long Context Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1308 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1329 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1288 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 80.2% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1257 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1314 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 51.4% |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek Coder 1.3B better than QwQ-32B?
QwQ-32B has enough public results to be ranked (#159); DeepSeek Coder 1.3B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Is DeepSeek Coder 1.3B or QwQ-32B better for coding?
QwQ-32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.4 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek Coder 1.3B and QwQ-32B share?
3 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek Coder 1.3B has 9 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.