Model comparison

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp vs Qwen3.5 397B-A17B

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 44.3 on the Noometry Index. DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp costs 4.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.5 397B-A17B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 29 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp DeepSeek

44.3

Rank #78 Confirmed

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B Alibaba (Qwen)

46.0

Rank #67 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 29 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3.5 397B-A17B in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads 34.5 to 22.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 36.7% for DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp and 58.9% for Qwen3.5 397B-A17B.
  • DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp is cheaper at $0.26 / $0.38 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $3.60 for Qwen3.5 397B-A17B.
  • Qwen3.5 397B-A17B accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 164K.

Side by side

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp and Qwen3.5 397B-A17B specifications
DeepSeek-V3.2-ExpQwen3.5 397B-A17B
ProviderDeepSeekAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index44.346.0
Released2025-09-292026-02-01
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window164K262K
Max output66K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.26$0.60
Output $ / M tokens$0.38$3.60
Results tracked4936

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), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 42.0 (#114)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpQwen3.5 397B-A17B
LMArena WebDev13621400
LMArena Coding14541465
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)70%—
Aider Polyglot74.2%—
SWE-bench Multilingual59%—
SciCode38.9%—
WeirdML39.5%—

Agentic & Tool Use Too close to call

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 32.7 (#59), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 33.3 (#53)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpQwen3.5 397B-A17B
APEX-Agents21.3%24.9%
Terminal-Bench39.6%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard56.7%—
TheAgentCompany42.9%—
τ²-bench Airline—81.5%
τ²-bench Banking—9.8%
τ²-bench Retail—84.4%
τ²-bench Telecom—97.8%
Vending-Bench 21,034—

Reasoning Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 22.1 (#208), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 34.5 (#70)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpQwen3.5 397B-A17B
Kagi LLM Benchmark52.2%73.7%
NYT Connections (extended)36.7%58.9%
Chess Puzzles14%13%
Thematic Generalization65%65.1%
LMArena Hard Prompts14341448
DTBench87.7%87.5%
LMCA29.1%37.9%
Epoch Capabilities Index146.27146.65
ARC-AGI-24%—
ARC-AGI-157%—
CritPt2.9%—
Mystery Game Puzzles—18%

Math Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 41.7 (#87), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 46.1 (#73)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpQwen3.5 397B-A17B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202587.8%88.9%
LMArena Math14351454
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—31.2%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions57.7%—
ProofBench8%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)22.1%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)2.1%—

Knowledge Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 51.7 (#66), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 53.3 (#58)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpQwen3.5 397B-A17B
GPQA Diamond83.4%86.4%
LMArena Expert14361462
Vectara Hallucination Rate5.3%—

Multimodal Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: —, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 40.7 (#44)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpQwen3.5 397B-A17B
LMArena Vision—1263

Multilingual Qwen3.5 397B-A17B leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 52.2 (#90), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 53.7 (#59)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpQwen3.5 397B-A17B
LMArena Non-English14091430
LMArena Chinese14611500
LMArena French14331461
LMArena German14401447
LMArena Japanese13741426
LMArena Korean13711384
LMArena Russian14241429
LMArena Spanish14401441

Instruction Following Too close to call

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 74.5 (#93), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 75.0 (#77)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpQwen3.5 397B-A17B
LMArena Instruction Following14131424

Long Context DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 47.6 (#16), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 44.1 (#74)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpQwen3.5 397B-A17B
LMArena Longer Query14281442
Fiction.LiveBench83.3%—
CL-bench13.2%—
CL-bench Life9.5%—

Writing & Preference Too close to call

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 62.4 (#77), Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: 62.3 (#79)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpQwen3.5 397B-A17B
LMArena Text14251438
LMArena Creative Writing14031401
EQ-Bench Creative Writing15151478
LMArena Multi-Turn14271446

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp better than Qwen3.5 397B-A17B?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.0 to 44.3 on the Noometry Index. DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp costs 4.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.5 397B-A17B's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp or Qwen3.5 397B-A17B?

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp is cheaper. It lists at $0.26 per million input tokens and $0.38 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 397B-A17B lists at $0.60 and $3.60.

Is DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp or Qwen3.5 397B-A17B better for coding?

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.5 versus 42.0 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5 397B-A17B does, with 262K tokens against 164K.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp and Qwen3.5 397B-A17B share?

29 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp has 49 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 397B-A17B has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper