# DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3 32B

> DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.8 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-vs-qwen3-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 20

## Summary

- They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen3 32B in 1 category; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads 50.2 to 20.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 98.3% for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and 66.9% for Qwen3 32B.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen3 32B.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.

## Snapshot

| | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 52.8 | 39.2 |
| Rank | 38 | 172 |
| Context | 1M | 131K |
| Input $/M | $0.15 | $0.70 |
| Output $/M | $0.60 | $2.80 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 52.9 (#32)
- Qwen3 32B: 37.7 (#190)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 51.9% | 35.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1506 | 1358 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 40% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1619 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,092 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 31.2 (#69)
- Qwen3 32B: 32.6 (#62)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 39.5% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 48.7% |
| GDP.pdf | 19.8% | — |

## Reasoning

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 50.2 (#36)
- Qwen3 32B: 20.2 (#241)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 14.3% | 0.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1483 | 1334 |
| DTBench | 89.9% | 67.5% |
| LMCA | 47% | 17.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 154.9 | 138.51 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 54.9% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 89.6% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 43% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 46.3% | — |

## Math

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 66.7 (#25)
- Qwen3 32B: 39.7 (#99)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.3% | 66.9% |
| LMArena Math | 1477 | 1399 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 67.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 26.8% | — |
| ProofBench | 54% | — |

## Knowledge

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 57.9 (#38)
- Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#125)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 89.8% | 65.7% |
| LMArena Expert | 1506 | 1362 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.9% |

## Multimodal

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 39.1 (#61)
- Qwen3 32B: —

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1277 | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 34.2% | — |

## Multilingual

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 55.0 (#35)
- Qwen3 32B: 45.6 (#167)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1448 | 1317 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1497 | 1357 |
| LMArena German | 1484 | 1341 |
| LMArena Russian | 1471 | 1311 |
| LMArena French | 1452 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1412 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1452 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1459 | — |

## Instruction Following

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 77.3 (#26)
- Qwen3 32B: 68.9 (#179)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1474 | 1305 |

## Long Context

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 45.2 (#47)
- Qwen3 32B: 43.8 (#87)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1475 | 1327 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 74.2% |

## Writing & Preference

- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 65.4 (#48)
- Qwen3 32B: 52.9 (#163)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1462 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1435 | 1297 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1457 | 1331 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1540 | — |

## FAQ

### Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash better than Qwen3 32B?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.8 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Qwen3 32B?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Qwen3 32B lists at $0.70 and $2.80.

### Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Qwen3 32B better for coding?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.9 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 131K.

### How many benchmarks do DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and Qwen3 32B share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has 37 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.