Head-to-head · multimodal vs multimodal

DeepSeek-R1 Base vs Qwen3: which model should you choose?

We compared DeepSeek-R1 Base and Qwen3 on price, context window and 12 benchmarks. Qwen3 has the stronger average benchmark score; Qwen3 is cheaper on a blended 3:1 basis.

DeepSeek

DeepSeek-R1 Base

DeepSeek-R1 Base is a multimodal model from DeepSeek. It offers a 400,000-token context window, costs $5.05 per million input tokens and $26.24 per million output tokens, and averages 80.1 across the index's benchmark suite.

Input
$5.05 / 1M
Output
$26.24 / 1M
Context
400,000
Avg score
80.1
Open weights
Yes
Full DeepSeek-R1 Base page
Alibaba Cloud

Qwen3

Qwen3 is a multimodal model from Alibaba Cloud. It offers a 128,000-token context window, costs $5.04 per million input tokens and $22.52 per million output tokens, and averages 80.3 across the index's benchmark suite.

Input
$5.04 / 1M
Output
$22.52 / 1M
Context
128,000
Avg score
80.3
Open weights
Yes
Full Qwen3 page

Specification comparison

SpecDeepSeek-R1 BaseQwen3Edge
Input price / 1M$5.05$5.04B
Output price / 1M$26.24$22.52B
Context window400,000128,000A
Max output65,5368,192A
Average score80.180.3B
Arena Elo1442.91420.9A
Open weightsYesYesTie

Benchmark comparison

DeepSeek-R1 Base wins 5, Qwen3 wins 7, and 0 benchmarks are tied. The table shows the modelled score for each model and the gap.

BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1 BaseQwen3GapWinner
MMLU-Pro81.081.20.2Qwen3
GPQA Diamond76.277.71.5Qwen3
SWE-bench Verified71.271.60.4Qwen3
HumanEval83.487.03.6Qwen3
MATH-50084.986.51.6Qwen3
AIME 202573.874.50.7Qwen3
LiveCodeBench76.073.82.2DeepSeek-R1 Base
IFEval88.285.62.6DeepSeek-R1 Base
TruthfulQA82.280.41.8DeepSeek-R1 Base
HellaSwag90.088.11.9DeepSeek-R1 Base
MMMU74.276.72.5Qwen3
Arena Elo1442.91420.922.0DeepSeek-R1 Base

Price analysis

On a blended 3:1 input-to-output basis, DeepSeek-R1 Base costs about $10.35 per million tokens and Qwen3 costs about $9.41. Qwen3 is roughly 9% cheaper than DeepSeek-R1 Base. At high volume, that gap compounds quickly, so price should carry real weight unless the quality difference is decisive.

DeepSeek-R1 Base has the larger context window at 400,000 tokens, compared with 128,000 for Qwen3. That matters for long documents, large codebases and multi-step agent traces.

Verdict

Across 12 shared benchmarks, DeepSeek-R1 Base wins 5, Qwen3 wins 7, and 0 are tied. On the index average, Qwen3 leads DeepSeek-R1 Base by 0.2 points (80.3 versus 80.1).

The price picture favours Qwen3. The context picture favours DeepSeek-R1 Base. Those two dimensions often matter more than a few benchmark points once a model is good enough for the task.

If you need a single default, start with Qwen3 for quality-sensitive work, and check whether its price holds at your expected volume before committing.

Choose DeepSeek-R1 Base if

  • You need the larger 400,000-token context window.
  • You need the larger 65,536-token output limit.

Choose Qwen3 if

  • You want the higher average benchmark score in this index.
  • Unit cost matters and you want the cheaper blended price.

FAQ

Is DeepSeek-R1 Base better than Qwen3?

On the index average, Qwen3 leads DeepSeek-R1 Base by 0.2 points (80.3 versus 80.1). The better choice depends on price, context and your task. DeepSeek-R1 Base wins 5 benchmarks, Qwen3 wins 7.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-R1 Base or Qwen3?

Qwen3 is cheaper on a blended 3:1 basis at about $9.41 per million tokens, versus $10.35 for DeepSeek-R1 Base.

Which has the larger context window?

DeepSeek-R1 Base has the larger context window at 400,000 tokens. Qwen3 has 128,000 tokens.

Are these models open weights?

DeepSeek-R1 Base is open weights; Qwen3 is open weights.

Which should I choose for production?

If you need a single default, start with Qwen3 for quality-sensitive work, and check whether its price holds at your expected volume before committing.

Related comparisons