Skip to content
VECTOR WIREAI INTELLIGENCE
⌘K
UTC
Models739Deals30d257Policy30d64, 14 pendingSources1,010

DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwen3.5 27B

DeepSeek · released

Wins 3 of 7 areas

Coding · Facts · Math

Alibaba · released

Wins 3 of 7 areas

Agents · Long documents · Following instructions

The two are evenly matched.DeepSeek-V3.2 is better at coding and facts; Qwen3.5 27B at agents and long documents.

Scores updated · 42 tests both models report · How we compare

Where each one wins

Tests won in each of the seven 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.

Following instructions rests on a single test.

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.

DeepSeek-V3.2$0.28 to read · $0.42 to write$0.70Price from Artificial Analysis
Qwen3.5 27B$0.30 to read · $2.40 to write$2.70Price from Artificial Analysis

DeepSeek-V3.2 costs 74% less for the same work.

The biggest differences

The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.

Where Qwen3.5 27B pulls ahead

  • Long, multi-file coding tasks in real codebasesSWE-bench Pro+35.6points aheadQwen3.5 27B51.2DeepSeek-V3.215.6
  • Real work tasks from 44 professionsGDPVal+23.2points aheadQwen3.5 27B33DeepSeek-V3.29.8
  • Follows unfamiliar, precisely checkable instructionsIFBench+14.9points aheadQwen3.5 27B75.6DeepSeek-V3.260.7

Where DeepSeek-V3.2 pulls ahead

  • Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+12.3points aheadDeepSeek-V3.233Qwen3.5 27B20.7
  • Hard command-line tasks in a real terminalTerminal-Bench Hard+3points aheadDeepSeek-V3.235.6Qwen3.5 27B32.6
  • Harvard-MIT high-school math contest problemsHMMT Feb. 2026+3points aheadDeepSeek-V3.284.1Qwen3.5 27B81.1

Every test, side by side

All 42 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.

CodingDeepSeek-V3.2

Full coding ranking

AgentsQwen3.5 27B

Full agents ranking

ReasoningEven

Full reasoning ranking

FactsDeepSeek-V3.2

Full facts ranking

MathDeepSeek-V3.2

Full math ranking

Long documentsQwen3.5 27B

Full long documents ranking

Following instructionsQwen3.5 27B
  • IFBenchQwen3.5 27B by 14.960.775.6+14.9

Full following instructions ranking

Other results20 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.

Questions people ask

Which is better, DeepSeek-V3.2 or Qwen3.5 27B?

DeepSeek-V3.2 and Qwen3.5 27B each win three of the seven areas where both have results. DeepSeek-V3.2 wins coding, facts and math; Qwen3.5 27B wins agents, long documents and following instructions. DeepSeek-V3.2 costs 74% less. They are level on reasoning.

Which is better for coding?

DeepSeek-V3.2. It wins 2 of the 7 coding tests both models report; Qwen3.5 27B wins 1, and 4 are ties.

Which is cheaper?

DeepSeek-V3.2 costs $0.28 per million input tokens and $0.42 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 27B costs $0.30 and $2.40. That makes DeepSeek-V3.2 about 74% cheaper for the same work.

How do you compare the two?

We use the 42 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 22 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 20 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.

Compare DeepSeek-V3.2 with

DeepSeek

Across the field

Compare Qwen3.5 27B with

Alibaba

Across the field

All comparisons