# DeepSeek-V3.1 vs Qwen Max

> DeepSeek-V3.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.8 to 34.7 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/deepseek-v3-1-vs-qwen-max
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 18

## Summary

- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek-V3.1 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen Max in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where DeepSeek-V3.1 leads 38.9 to 22.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Fiction.LiveBench: 52.8% for DeepSeek-V3.1 and 66.7% for Qwen Max.
- DeepSeek-V3.1 is cheaper at $0.25 / $0.95 per million input/output tokens, against $1.60 / $6.40 for Qwen Max.
- DeepSeek-V3.1 accepts more context: 164K tokens versus 33K.
- DeepSeek-V3.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | DeepSeek-V3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 42.8 | 34.7 |
| Rank | 108 | 230 |
| Context | 164K | 33K |
| Input $/M | $0.25 | $1.60 |
| Output $/M | $0.95 | $6.40 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- DeepSeek-V3.1: 40.3 (#144)
- Qwen Max: 30.7 (#292)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1417 | 1288 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 21.8% |
| WeirdML | 38.4% | — |

## Reasoning

- DeepSeek-V3.1: 27.9 (#110)
- Qwen Max: 25.1 (#151)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1417 | 1269 |
| SimpleBench | 40% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 53.2% | — |
| DTBench | 82.7% | — |
| LMCA | 24.3% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 139.92 | — |
| ForecastBench | 58 | — |

## Math

- DeepSeek-V3.1: 38.9 (#122)
- Qwen Max: 22.3 (#276)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1420 | 1275 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 16.1% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 67.2% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 1% |

## Knowledge

- DeepSeek-V3.1: 43.7 (#90)
- Qwen Max: 30.3 (#228)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1405 | 1248 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 56.1% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 5.5% | — |

## Multilingual

- DeepSeek-V3.1: 51.6 (#106)
- Qwen Max: 41.8 (#202)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1400 | 1263 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1469 | 1254 |
| LMArena French | 1447 | 1330 |
| LMArena German | 1411 | 1254 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1378 | 1205 |
| LMArena Korean | 1337 | 1142 |
| LMArena Russian | 1405 | 1274 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1431 | 1290 |

## Instruction Following

- DeepSeek-V3.1: 73.9 (#110)
- Qwen Max: 66.5 (#208)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1400 | 1262 |

## Long Context

- DeepSeek-V3.1: 36.3 (#232)
- Qwen Max: 39.4 (#180)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 52.8% | 66.7% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1422 | 1288 |

## Writing & Preference

- DeepSeek-V3.1: 60.3 (#98)
- Qwen Max: 47.8 (#205)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1420 | 1282 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1401 | 1248 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1408 | 1277 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1436 | — |

## FAQ

### Is DeepSeek-V3.1 better than Qwen Max?

DeepSeek-V3.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.8 to 34.7 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-V3.1 or Qwen Max?

DeepSeek-V3.1 is cheaper. It lists at $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.95 per million output tokens; Qwen Max lists at $1.60 and $6.40.

### Is DeepSeek-V3.1 or Qwen Max better for coding?

DeepSeek-V3.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.3 versus 30.7 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

DeepSeek-V3.1 does, with 164K tokens against 33K.

### How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V3.1 and Qwen Max share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V3.1 has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Max has 23.