Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

DeepSeek V3.1 vs Qwen-Plus

Updated October 21, 2026. 2 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

DeepSeek V3.1DeepSeek
Coding
No data
Overall
13.7
Output $/M
$1.50
2
Qwen-PlusQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.78
0
vs boards won of 2 shared

Decision reading

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Shared results
2
DeepSeek V3.1 only
8
Qwen-Plus only
26
Like-for-like categories
1 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
DeepSeek V3.1 not benchmarked, Qwen-Plus not benchmarked.
Widest category
General, 1.0 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
DTBench: DeepSeek V3.1 82.7% against Qwen-Plus 81.1%, 1.6 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
DeepSeek V3.1 $1.50 against Qwen-Plus $0.78 per million output tokens, 1.9x apart.
Context window
DeepSeek V3.1 takes 164K tokens, Qwen-Plus 1M.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryDeepSeek V3.1BarsQwen-PlusTies
General20
All shared boards20
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index2 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 and Qwen-Plus
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1Qwen-PlusLeader
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1328Only Qwen-Plus measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1343Only Qwen-Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 and Qwen-Plus
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1Qwen-PlusLeader
AA Intelligence Index13.7Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 and Qwen-Plus
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1Qwen-PlusLeader
Neither model has a result on 39 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 and Qwen-Plus
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1Qwen-PlusLeader
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured48.1%Only Qwen-Plus measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1317Only Qwen-Plus measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1328Only Qwen-Plus measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1333Only Qwen-Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 and Qwen-Plus
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1Qwen-PlusLeader
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured17.8%Only Qwen-Plus measured
MATH level 5Not measured65.3%Only Qwen-Plus measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1326Only Qwen-Plus measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1332Only Qwen-Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 and Qwen-Plus
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1Qwen-PlusLeader
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1352Only Qwen-Plus measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1350Only Qwen-Plus measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1349Only Qwen-Plus measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1303Only Qwen-Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 and Qwen-Plus
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1Qwen-PlusLeader
Design Arena: websites1123Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 measured
Design Arena: UI components1085Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 measured
Design Arena: game dev1084Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 measured
Design Arena: data viz1095Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 measured
Design Arena: 3D1077Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1112Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 measured
Design Arena: SVG967Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
General benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 and Qwen-Plus
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1Qwen-PlusLeader
DTBench82.7%81.1%DeepSeek V3.1
LMCA24.3%24.0%DeepSeek V3.1
LMArena TextNot measured1326Only Qwen-Plus measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1303Only Qwen-Plus measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1292Only Qwen-Plus measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1339Only Qwen-Plus measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1310Only Qwen-Plus measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1347Only Qwen-Plus measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1251Only Qwen-Plus measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1323Only Qwen-Plus measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1336Only Qwen-Plus measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1324Only Qwen-Plus measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1296Only Qwen-Plus measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1270Only Qwen-Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 and Qwen-Plus
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1Qwen-PlusLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

DeepSeek V3.1$0.0013Fits in one request
Qwen-Plus$0.0006Fits in one request

Qwen-Plus costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

DeepSeek V3.1$0.032Fits in one request
Qwen-Plus$0.015Fits in one request

Qwen-Plus costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

DeepSeek V3.1$0.125Exceeds the context window
Qwen-Plus$0.060Fits in one request

Qwen-Plus costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of DeepSeek V3.1 and Qwen-Plus
SpecificationDeepSeek V3.1Qwen-Plus
MakerDeepSeekQwen
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedAugust 21, 2025February 1, 2025
Context window164K1M
Input $/Mtok$0.55$0.26
Output $/Mtok$1.50$0.78
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is DeepSeek V3.1 better than Qwen-Plus for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

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

DeepSeek V3.1 costs $0.55 per million input tokens and $1.50 per million output tokens; Qwen-Plus costs $0.26 and $0.78. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, DeepSeek V3.1 or Qwen-Plus?

Qwen-Plus, with 1M tokens against 164K.

How many benchmarks is the DeepSeek V3.1 vs Qwen-Plus comparison based on?

2 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. DeepSeek V3.1's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen-Plus's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next