DeepSeek-R1 vs Qwen3 Coder Next
Wins 4 of 6 areas
Agents · Facts · Long documents · Following instructions
Wins 2 of 6 areas
Coding · Reasoning
DeepSeek-R1 is the stronger all-rounder.Qwen3 Coder Next is cheaper and better at reasoning.
Scores updated · 16 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the six areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up20DeepSeek-R12 of 2 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own10DeepSeek-R11 of 2 tests · 1 tie
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10DeepSeek-R11 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked10DeepSeek-R11 of 1 test
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking02Qwen3 Coder Next2 of 3 tests · 1 tie
- CodingWriting and fixing software12Qwen3 Coder Next2 of 3 tests
Long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
Qwen3 Coder Next costs 70% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.
Where DeepSeek-R1 pulls ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+14.3points ahead
- Reasons across sets of long documentsAA-LCR+10.7points ahead
- Follows unfamiliar, precisely checkable instructionsIFBench+3.8points ahead
Where Qwen3 Coder Next pulls ahead
- Command-line tasks in a real terminalTerminal-Bench 2.1+19.1points ahead
- Hard command-line tasks in a real terminalTerminal-Bench Hard+12.1points ahead
- Graduate-level biology, physics and chemistry questionsGPQA Diamond+2.9points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 16 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingQwen3 Coder Next
- Terminal-Bench 2.1Qwen3 Coder Next by 19.119.138.2+19.1
- Terminal-Bench HardQwen3 Coder Next by 12.16.118.2+12.1
- SciCodeDeepSeek-R1 by 2.138.336.2+2.1
AgentsDeepSeek-R1
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingDeepSeek-R1 by 16.45.4+1
- Terminal-Bench 4.0tie00tie
ReasoningQwen3 Coder Next
- GPQA DiamondQwen3 Coder Next by 2.970.873.7+2.9
- Humanity's Last ExamQwen3 Coder Next by 1.68.510.1+1.6
- CritPttie0.60tie
FactsDeepSeek-R1
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyDeepSeek-R1 by 14.330.516.1+14.3
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationDeepSeek-R1 by 3.49.76.3+3.4
Following instructionsDeepSeek-R1
- IFBenchDeepSeek-R1 by 3.83935.2+3.8
Other results4 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Qwen3 Coder Next by 68.111.479.5+68.1
- AA-OmniscienceDeepSeek-R1 by 30.2-32.2-62.4+30.2
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexQwen3 Coder Next by 11.624.636.2+11.6
- AA IntelligenceDeepSeek-R1 by 2.211.49.2+2.2
Questions people ask
Which is better, DeepSeek-R1 or Qwen3 Coder Next?
DeepSeek-R1 wins four of the six areas where both have results: agents, facts, long documents and following instructions. Qwen3 Coder Next wins coding and reasoning, and costs 70% less.
Which is better for coding?
Qwen3 Coder Next. It wins 2 of the 3 coding tests both models report; DeepSeek-R1 wins 1.
Which is cheaper?
DeepSeek-R1 costs $2.00 per million input tokens and $4.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3 Coder Next costs $0.30 and $1.50. That makes Qwen3 Coder Next about 70% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 16 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 12 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 4 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.