Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Deepseek
Deepseek
vs
Qwen
Qwen

DeepSeek V3.1 vs Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto)

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

Get our weekly newsletter on pricing changes, new releases, and tools.

Join the Price Per Token Community

Key Takeaways

DeepSeek V3.1 wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
  • Better at math
  • Has reasoning mode

Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto) wins:

  • Larger context window
  • Faster response time
Price Advantage
DeepSeek V3.1
Benchmark Advantage
DeepSeek V3.1
Context Window
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto)
Speed
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto)

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureDeepSeek V3.1Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto)
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyDeepSeek V3.1Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto)
LicenseOpen SourceOpen Source
AuthorDeepseekQwen
ReleasedAug 2025Jul 2025

DeepSeek V3.1 Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto) Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Frequently Asked Questions

DeepSeek V3.1 has cheaper input pricing at $0.15/M tokens. DeepSeek V3.1 has cheaper output pricing at $0.75/M tokens.
DeepSeek V3.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 28.4, compared to Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto)'s score of 24.6.
DeepSeek V3.1 has a 32,768 token context window, while Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto) has a 262,144 token context window.
DeepSeek V3.1 does not support vision. Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B (exacto) does not support vision.