Model comparison

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus vs Qwen3 Coder Next

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 34.3 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 Coder Next costs 1.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 2 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus

DeepSeek

43.1

Rank #97 Confirmed

Qwen3 Coder Next

Alibaba (Qwen)

34.3

Rank #232 Reported

Summary

They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3 Coder Next in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in coding, where DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus leads 42.0 to 36.3.
The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 40.6% for DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus and 32.3% for Qwen3 Coder Next.
Qwen3 Coder Next is cheaper at $0.12 / $0.80 per million input/output tokens, against $0.27 / $1 for DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus.
Qwen3 Coder Next accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 164K.

Side by side

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus and Qwen3 Coder Next specifications
	DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus	Qwen3 Coder Next
Provider	DeepSeek	Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index	43.1	34.3
Released	2025-09-22	2026-02-02
Weights	Open	Open
Context window	164K	262K
Max output	147K	66K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.27	$0.12
Output $ / M tokens	$1	$0.80
Results tracked	16	3

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

Category by category

Coding DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus leads

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 42.0 (#113), Qwen3 Coder Next: 36.3 (#210)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus	Qwen3 Coder Next
SciCode	40.6%	32.3%
WeirdML	—	34.4%
LMArena Coding	1426	—
ALE-Bench	745.17	—

Reasoning DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus leads

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 26.4 (#133), Qwen3 Coder Next: 22.4 (#196)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus	Qwen3 Coder Next
CritPt	1.7%	0%
Kagi LLM Benchmark	57.4%	—
LMArena Hard Prompts	1426	—
DTBench	81.3%	—
LMCA	28.6%	—

Math Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 38.5 (#137), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus	Qwen3 Coder Next
LMArena Math	1402	—

Multilingual Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 52.1 (#92), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus	Qwen3 Coder Next
LMArena Non-English	1407	—
LMArena Russian	1436	—

Instruction Following Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 74.0 (#106), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus	Qwen3 Coder Next
LMArena Instruction Following	1404	—

Long Context Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 43.4 (#97), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus	Qwen3 Coder Next
LMArena Longer Query	1421	—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 61.0 (#92), Qwen3 Coder Next: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus	Qwen3 Coder Next
LMArena Text	1419	—
LMArena Creative Writing	1403	—
LMArena Multi-Turn	1411	—

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus better than Qwen3 Coder Next?

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus or Qwen3 Coder Next?

Qwen3 Coder Next is cheaper. It lists at $0.12 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus lists at $0.27 and $1.

Is DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus or Qwen3 Coder Next better for coding?

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.0 versus 36.3 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3 Coder Next does, with 262K tokens against 164K.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus and Qwen3 Coder Next share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 Coder Next has 3.