Model comparison
DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp vs Qwen1.5-110B
DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.3 to 34.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeek
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen1.5-110B in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads 62.4 to 38.0.
Side by side
| DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp | Qwen1.5-110B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 44.3 | 34.2 |
| Released | 2025-09-29 | 2024-04-25 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 164K | — |
| Max output | 66K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.26 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.38 | — |
| Results tracked | 49 | 20 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads
DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 46.5 (#65), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.0 (#264)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1454 | 1184 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 70% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 74.2% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1362 | — |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | 59% | — |
| SciCode | 38.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 39.5% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 35% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 44.4% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 32.7 (#59), Qwen1.5-110B: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 39.6% | — |
| APEX-Agents | 21.3% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 56.7% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | 42.9% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 1,034 | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 22.1 (#208), Qwen1.5-110B: 22.7 (#189)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1434 | 1168 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 4% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 52.2% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 36.7% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 57% | — |
| CritPt | 2.9% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 14% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 65% | — |
| DTBench | 87.7% | — |
| LMCA | 29.1% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 146.27 | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 57.7 |
Math DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads
DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 41.7 (#87), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.7 (#201)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1435 | 1185 |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 57.7% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 87.8% | — |
| ProofBench | 8% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 22.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 2.1% | — |
Knowledge DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads
DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 51.7 (#66), Qwen1.5-110B: 31.2 (#219)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1436 | 1144 |
| GPQA Diamond | 83.4% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 5.3% | — |
Multilingual DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads
DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 52.2 (#90), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.6 (#250)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1409 | 1142 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1461 | 1206 |
| LMArena French | 1433 | 1151 |
| LMArena German | 1440 | 1123 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1374 | 1074 |
| LMArena Korean | 1371 | 1044 |
| LMArena Russian | 1424 | 1118 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1440 | 1142 |
Instruction Following DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads
DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 74.5 (#93), Qwen1.5-110B: 60.3 (#252)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1413 | 1158 |
Long Context DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads
DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 47.6 (#16), Qwen1.5-110B: 35.1 (#242)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1428 | 1157 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 83.3% | — |
| CL-bench | 13.2% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 9.5% | — |
Writing & Preference DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads
DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 62.4 (#77), Qwen1.5-110B: 38.0 (#255)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1425 | 1175 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1403 | 1148 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1427 | 1160 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1515 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp better than Qwen1.5-110B?
DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.3 to 34.2 on the Noometry Index.
Is DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp or Qwen1.5-110B better for coding?
DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.5 versus 33.0 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp and Qwen1.5-110B share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp has 49 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-110B has 20.