# DeepSeek-V3.1 vs QwQ-32B

> DeepSeek-V3.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/deepseek-v3-1-vs-qwq-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 21

## Summary

- They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek-V3.1 scores higher in 6 categories and QwQ-32B in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where QwQ-32B leads 49.0 to 36.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Fiction.LiveBench: 52.8% for DeepSeek-V3.1 and 83.3% for QwQ-32B.

## Snapshot

| | DeepSeek-V3.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 42.2 | 39.4 |
| Rank | 106 | 153 |
| Context | 164K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.25 | — |
| Output $/M | $0.95 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- DeepSeek-V3.1: 39.8 (#140)
- QwQ-32B: 34.9 (#220)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1417 | 1333 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 20.9% |
| WeirdML | 38.4% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 44.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 72.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54.4% |

## Reasoning

- DeepSeek-V3.1: 27.3 (#109)
- QwQ-32B: 22.9 (#171)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1417 | 1326 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 139.92 | 137.6 |
| ForecastBench | 58 | 58.3 |
| SimpleBench | 40% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 53.2% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 83.5% |
| DTBench | 82.7% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65% |
| LMCA | 24.3% | — |
| LiveBench | — | 72% |

## Math

- DeepSeek-V3.1: 36.1 (#125)
- QwQ-32B: 36.2 (#123)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1420 | 1359 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 59.2% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 77.8% |

## Knowledge

- DeepSeek-V3.1: 43.0 (#86)
- QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#150)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1403 | 1323 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.3% |
| Confabulations | — | 15.6% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 5.5% | — |

## Multilingual

- DeepSeek-V3.1: 51.8 (#100)
- QwQ-32B: 45.0 (#171)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1400 | 1306 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1470 | 1378 |
| LMArena French | 1447 | 1337 |
| LMArena German | 1412 | 1313 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1374 | 1263 |
| LMArena Korean | 1337 | 1278 |
| LMArena Russian | 1405 | 1297 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1429 | 1353 |

## Instruction Following

- DeepSeek-V3.1: 74.1 (#105)
- QwQ-32B: 72.8 (#131)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1400 | 1297 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.8% |

## Long Context

- DeepSeek-V3.1: 36.3 (#227)
- QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 52.8% | 83.3% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1422 | 1308 |

## Writing & Preference

- DeepSeek-V3.1: 60.5 (#93)
- QwQ-32B: 50.9 (#175)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1 | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1420 | 1329 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1401 | 1288 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1436 | 1257 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1408 | 1314 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 80.2% |
| LiveBench Language | — | 51.4% |

## FAQ

### Is DeepSeek-V3.1 better than QwQ-32B?

DeepSeek-V3.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Is DeepSeek-V3.1 or QwQ-32B better for coding?

DeepSeek-V3.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.8 versus 34.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V3.1 and QwQ-32B share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V3.1 has 27 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.