The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B vs Qwen3.8 Flash

Qwen3.8 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 49.6 to 13.3. DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B is 1.7x cheaper per token.

DeepSeek · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Qwen3.8 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 49.6 to 13.3, ranking #16 overall.

In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Qwen3.8 Flash wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B is roughly 1.7x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Qwen3.8 Flash also accepts a larger context window (1,000,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B

  • cost matters — it's about 1.7x cheaper per token
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

Choose Qwen3.8 Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 49.6 and ranks #16 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,000,000 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B
DeepSeek
Qwen3.8 Flash
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
13.3
#231
49.6
#16
Reasoning
13.5
#223
49.2
#16
Coding
8.3
#170
36.6
#20
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
0 of 1
1 of 1
Input price
$0.12 / M
$0.15 / M
Output price
$0.18 / M
$0.47 / M
Context window
128,000
1,000,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B
Qwen3.8 Flash
Math
15.2#207
32.6#55
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

4 reported for DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B · 22 for Qwen3.8 Flash

1 shared

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Qwen3.8 Flash is better at 1 benchmark (GPQA).

Qwen3.8 Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Mon Aug 31 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B costs less

For input processing, DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B ($0.12/1M tokens) is 1.3x cheaper than Qwen3.8 Flash ($0.15/1M tokens).

For output processing, DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B ($0.18/1M tokens) is 2.6x cheaper than Qwen3.8 Flash ($0.47/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Qwen3.8 Flash is more expensive than DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Mon Aug 31 2026 • llm-stats.com
DeepSeek
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B
Input tokens$0.12
Output tokens$0.18
Best providerDeepinfra
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8 Flash
Input tokens$0.15
Output tokens$0.47
Best providerNovita
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

92.2B diff

Qwen3.8 Flash has 92.2B more parameters than DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B, making it 281.1% larger.

DeepSeek
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B
32.8Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8 Flash
125.0Bparameters
32.8B
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B
125.0B
Qwen3.8 Flash

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Qwen3.8 Flash accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B's 128,000 tokens. Qwen3.8 Flash can generate longer responses up to 131,072 tokens, while DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B is limited to 128,000 tokens.

DeepSeek
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8 Flash
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Mon Aug 31 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Qwen3.8 Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B does not.

Qwen3.8 Flash can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3.8 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B is licensed under MIT, while Qwen3.8 Flash uses a proprietary license.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B

MIT

Open weights

Qwen3.8 Flash

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B was released on 2025-01-20, while Qwen3.8 Flash was released on 2026-08-26.

Qwen3.8 Flash is 19 months newer than DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B.

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B

Jan 20, 2025

1.6 years ago

Qwen3.8 Flash

Aug 26, 2026

4 days ago

1.6yr newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B is available from DeepInfra. Qwen3.8 Flash is available from Novita.

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.12/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.18/1M

Qwen3.8 Flash

novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.47/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B and Qwen3.8 Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B
✓ Preferred
Qwen3.8 Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B vs Qwen3.8 Flash.

Which is better, DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B or Qwen3.8 Flash?

Qwen3.8 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 49.6 to 13.3. DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B is made by DeepSeek and Qwen3.8 Flash is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B compare to Qwen3.8 Flash in benchmarks?

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B scores MATH-500: 94.3%, AIME 2024: 83.3%, GPQA: 62.1%, LiveCodeBench: 57.2%. Qwen3.8 Flash scores MathVision: 95.7%, LiveCodeBench v6: 91.9%, GPQA: 91.7%, CharXiv-R: 90.6%, RealWorldQA: 88.5%.

Is DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B cheaper than Qwen3.8 Flash?

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B is 1.3x cheaper for input tokens. DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B costs $0.12/M input and $0.18/M output via deepinfra. Qwen3.8 Flash costs $0.15/M input and $0.47/M output via novita.

What are the context window sizes for DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B and Qwen3.8 Flash?

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B supports 128K tokens and Qwen3.8 Flash supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B and Qwen3.8 Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (13.3 vs 49.6), context window (128K vs 1.0M), input pricing ($0.12 vs $0.15/M), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (MIT vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B and Qwen3.8 Flash?

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B is developed by DeepSeek and Qwen3.8 Flash is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons