Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

R1 0528 vs Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507

R1 0528 leads Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 13.1 to 12.7, and R1 0528 costs 1.6x less per output token ($2.18 vs $3.50 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 39 benchmarks have a result for both.

R1 0528DeepSeek
Coding
No data
Overall
46.8
Output $/M
$2.18
21
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Qwen
Coding
No data
Overall
52.9
Output $/M
$3.50
17
vs boards won of 39 shared, 1 tied

R1 0528 or Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: which to pick

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

Pick R1 0528 for output tokens 1.6x cheaper ($2.18 vs $3.50 per million) and a larger context window (164K against 128K tokens).

Shared results
39
R1 0528 only
24
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 only
7
Like-for-like categories
7 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

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
R1 0528 not benchmarked, Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Web design, 17.6 points apart on average over 6 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Design Arena: data viz: R1 0528 1182 against Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 950, 29.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
R1 0528 $2.18 against Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 $3.50 per million output tokens, 1.6x apart.
Context window
R1 0528 takes 164K tokens, Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 128K.

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
CategoryR1 0528BarsQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Ties
Coding30
Intelligence10
Reasoning04
Math03
Knowledge13
Web design60
General1071 tie
All shared boards21171 tie
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index30
Coding benchmarks for R1 0528 and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkR1 0528Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
Aider polyglot71.4%Not measuredOnly R1 0528 measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured22.1Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)77.0%Not measuredOnly R1 0528 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)15.9%Not measuredOnly R1 0528 measured
WeirdML41.6%41.0%R1 0528
ALE-Bench804.1Not measuredOnly R1 0528 measured
LMArena Text: coding14271424R1 0528
LMArena Text: software and IT14351431R1 0528
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for R1 0528 and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkR1 0528Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
AA Intelligence Index13.112.7R1 0528
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for R1 0528 and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkR1 0528Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured1.3Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom36.5%Not measuredOnly R1 0528 measured
METR time horizons53.8%Not measuredOnly R1 0528 measured
DeepResearch Bench35.1%Not measuredOnly R1 0528 measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured-$11Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
BrowseComp-Plus16.4%Not measuredOnly R1 0528 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Reasoning benchmarks for R1 0528 and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkR1 0528Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)81.3%Not measuredOnly R1 0528 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)15.8%Not measuredOnly R1 0528 measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)76.3%80.1%Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
ARC-AGI21.2%Not measuredOnly R1 0528 measured
ARC-AGI-21.1%Not measuredOnly R1 0528 measured
SimpleBench40.8%Not measuredOnly R1 0528 measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured9.0%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14151416Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: expert13941463Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14221432Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Math benchmarks for R1 0528 and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkR1 0528Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
AA Math Index76.0Not measuredOnly R1 0528 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)76.0%Not measuredOnly R1 0528 measured
OTIS Mock AIME66.4%86.7%Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
MATH level 596.6%Not measuredOnly R1 0528 measured
LMArena Text: math14001412Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: mathematical work14151435Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
MathArena12.9%Not measuredOnly R1 0528 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13
Knowledge benchmarks for R1 0528 and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkR1 0528Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)84.9%Not measuredOnly R1 0528 measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured40.4%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: science14301433Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14451456Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: legal and government14191415R1 0528
LMArena Text: business and finance14021413Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
PRBench Finance32.7%Not measuredOnly R1 0528 measured
PRBench Legal36.6%Not measuredOnly R1 0528 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Web design benchmarks for R1 0528 and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkR1 0528Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
Design Arena: websites11491052R1 0528
Design Arena: UI components1100942R1 0528
Design Arena: game dev1097956R1 0528
Design Arena: data viz1182950R1 0528
Design Arena: 3D1110997R1 0528
Design Arena: all code categories11381032R1 0528
Design Arena: SVG1038Not measuredOnly R1 0528 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index107
General benchmarks for R1 0528 and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkR1 0528Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
IFBench39.6%Not measuredOnly R1 0528 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)55.7%Not measuredOnly R1 0528 measured
DTBenchNot measured80.3%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMCANot measured29.3%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Fiction.LiveBench75.0%75.0%Tie
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)81.9%82.4%Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text14281415R1 0528
LMArena Text: instruction following13821386Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: creative writing14051384R1 0528
LMArena Text: English14371429R1 0528
LMArena Text: non-English14121397R1 0528
LMArena Text: Chinese14421481Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: German14041408Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: Japanese13911386R1 0528
LMArena Text: Korean13601375Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: French1417Not measuredOnly R1 0528 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish14111389R1 0528
LMArena Text: Russian14231401R1 0528
LMArena Text: Polish14281390R1 0528
LMArena Text: multi-turn14051406Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: longer queries13911400Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
LMArena Text: writing and language14021388R1 0528
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14001370R1 0528
Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for R1 0528 and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkR1 0528Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
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

R1 0528$0.0016Fits in one request
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507$0.0022Fits in one request

R1 0528 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

R1 0528$0.032Fits in one request
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507$0.033Fits in one request

R1 0528 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

R1 0528$0.122Exceeds the context window
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507$0.125Exceeds the context window

R1 0528 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 R1 0528 and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
SpecificationDeepSeek R1 0528Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
MakerDeepSeekQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedMay 28, 2025July 25, 2025
Context window164K128K
Input $/Mtok$0.50$0.45
Output $/Mtok$2.18$3.50
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is R1 0528 better than Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick R1 0528 for output tokens 1.6x cheaper ($2.18 vs $3.50 per million) and a larger context window (164K against 128K tokens).

Which is cheaper, R1 0528 or Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507?

R1 0528 costs $0.50 per million input tokens and $2.18 per million output tokens; Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 costs $0.45 and $3.50. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, R1 0528 or Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507?

R1 0528, with 164K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the R1 0528 vs Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 comparison based on?

39 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. R1 0528's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next