Model comparison

DeepSeek-V3 vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 39.5 on the Noometry Index. DeepSeek-V3 costs 1.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 24 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek-V3 DeepSeek

39.5

Rank #166 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

45.3

Rank #72 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek-V3 scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.7 Plus in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.7 Plus leads 39.3 to 20.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 37.8% for DeepSeek-V3 and 93.3% for Qwen3.7 Plus.
  • DeepSeek-V3 is cheaper at $0.24 / $0.90 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $1.60 for Qwen3.7 Plus.
  • Qwen3.7 Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 164K.
  • DeepSeek-V3 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

DeepSeek-V3 and Qwen3.7 Plus specifications
DeepSeek-V3Qwen3.7 Plus
ProviderDeepSeekAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index39.545.3
Released2024-12-262026-06-02
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window164K1M
Max output164K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.24$0.40
Output $ / M tokens$0.90$1.60
Results tracked6032

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

Category by category

Coding DeepSeek-V3 leads

DeepSeek-V3: 42.3 (#106), Qwen3.7 Plus: 36.6 (#206)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3Qwen3.7 Plus
SciCode35.8%45.5%
LMArena Coding13681473
FrontierCode—10.2%
Aider Polyglot55.1%—
WeirdML36.1%—
BigCodeBench Instruct50%—
LiveBench Coding70.9%—
BigCodeBench Complete62.2%—
HumanEval+86.6%—
MBPP+73%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 21.4 (#138)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3Qwen3.7 Plus
OSWorld 2.0—2.8%
METR Time Horizons49.6%—

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Plus leads

DeepSeek-V3: 20.5 (#236), Qwen3.7 Plus: 39.3 (#59)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3Qwen3.7 Plus
CritPt0%9.1%
LMArena Hard Prompts13651460
DTBench64.8%84%
LMCA15.5%37.6%
Epoch Capabilities Index135.94147.37
SimpleBench27.2%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark52.3%—
NYT Connections (extended)—74.8%
Chess Puzzles—24%
LiveBench Reasoning65.8%—
Mystery Game Puzzles—17%
LiveBench Data Analysis60.9%—
BIG-Bench Hard87.5%—
ForecastBench59.1—
HellaSwag88.9%—
LiveBench66.9%—
PIQA84.7%—
WinoGrande85.2%—

Math Qwen3.7 Plus leads

DeepSeek-V3: 32.1 (#219), Qwen3.7 Plus: 50.5 (#56)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3Qwen3.7 Plus
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202537.8%93.3%
LMArena Math13731466
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—34.4%
Omni-MATH40.3%—
LiveBench Math73.5%—
MATH Level 575.5%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)1.7%—

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Plus leads

DeepSeek-V3: 37.5 (#155), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.9 (#51)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3Qwen3.7 Plus
GPQA Diamond67.6%87.9%
LMArena Expert13511467
MMLU-Pro72.3%—
Confabulations26.1%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate6.1%—
GPQA (HELM)53.8%—
ARC (AI2) Challenge95.3%—
MMLU87.2%—
TriviaQA82.9%—

Multimodal Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 41.8 (#33)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Vision—1279
LMArena Document—1444

Multilingual Qwen3.7 Plus leads

DeepSeek-V3: 48.5 (#143), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.8 (#38)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Non-English13581445
LMArena Chinese13911510
LMArena French13851473
LMArena German13741471
LMArena Japanese13331413
LMArena Korean13191415
LMArena Russian13731457
LMArena Spanish13581457

Instruction Following Qwen3.7 Plus leads

DeepSeek-V3: 72.8 (#130), Qwen3.7 Plus: 75.8 (#52)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Instruction Following13451440
LiveBench Instruction Following81.5%—
IFEval83.2%—

Long Context Qwen3.7 Plus leads

DeepSeek-V3: 34.0 (#253), Qwen3.7 Plus: 44.5 (#65)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Longer Query13521455
Fiction.LiveBench50%—

Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Plus leads

DeepSeek-V3: 57.4 (#130), Qwen3.7 Plus: 64.3 (#56)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3Qwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text13751455
LMArena Creative Writing13641439
LMArena Multi-Turn13891460
Short-Story Creative Writing77%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1472—
WildBench83%—
LiveBench Language49.1%—

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek-V3 better than Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 39.5 on the Noometry Index. DeepSeek-V3 costs 1.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-V3 or Qwen3.7 Plus?

DeepSeek-V3 is cheaper. It lists at $0.24 per million input tokens and $0.90 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Plus lists at $0.40 and $1.60.

Is DeepSeek-V3 or Qwen3.7 Plus better for coding?

DeepSeek-V3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.3 versus 36.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.7 Plus does, with 1M tokens against 164K.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V3 and Qwen3.7 Plus share?

24 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V3 has 60 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Plus has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper