The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B vs Step-3.5-Flash

Step-3.5-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 37.1 to 13.1. DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B is 1.3x cheaper per token.

DeepSeek · StepFun · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Step-3.5-Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 37.1 to 13.1, ranking #75 overall.

On price, DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B is roughly 1.3x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B also accepts a larger context window (128,000 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 1.3x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 128,000 token context window

Choose Step-3.5-Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 37.1 and ranks #75 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Feb 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B
DeepSeek
Step-3.5-Flash
StepFun
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
13.1
#255
37.1
#75
Reasoning
13.3
#244
37.2
#74
Coding
8.1
#189
20.5
#103
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.12 / M
$0.10 / M
Output price
$0.18 / M
$0.40 / M
Context window
128,000
65,536

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B
Step-3.5-Flash
Math
15.1#218
33.9#51
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

4 reported for DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B · 7 for Step-3.5-Flash

No common benchmarks found

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B and Step-3.5-Flashdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

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 1.2x more expensive than Step-3.5-Flash ($0.10/1M tokens).

For output processing, DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B ($0.18/1M tokens) is 2.2x cheaper than Step-3.5-Flash ($0.40/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Step-3.5-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 Sep 28 2026 • llm-stats.com
DeepSeek
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B
Input tokens$0.12
Output tokens$0.18
Best providerDeepinfra
StepFun
Step-3.5-Flash
Input tokens$0.10
Output tokens$0.40
Best providerStepFun
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

163.2B diff

Step-3.5-Flash has 163.2B more parameters than DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B, making it 497.6% larger.

DeepSeek
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B
32.8Bparameters
StepFun
Step-3.5-Flash
196.0Bparameters
32.8B
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B
196.0B
Step-3.5-Flash

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B accepts 128,000 input tokens compared to Step-3.5-Flash's 65,536 tokens. DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while Step-3.5-Flash is limited to 8,192 tokens.

DeepSeek
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
StepFun
Step-3.5-Flash
Input65,536 tokens
Output8,192 tokens
Mon Sep 28 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B is licensed under MIT, while Step-3.5-Flash uses Apache 2.0.

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

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B

MIT

Open weights

Step-3.5-Flash

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B was released on 2025-01-20, while Step-3.5-Flash was released on 2026-02-02.

Step-3.5-Flash is 13 months newer than DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B.

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B

Jan 20, 2025

1.7 years ago

Step-3.5-Flash

Feb 2, 2026

7 months ago

1.0yr 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. Step-3.5-Flash is available from StepFun.

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B

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

Step-3.5-Flash

stepfun logo
StepFun
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.40/1M
* 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 Step-3.5-Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B
✓ Preferred
Step-3.5-Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B vs Step-3.5-Flash.

Which is better, DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B or Step-3.5-Flash?

Step-3.5-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 37.1 to 13.1. DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B is made by DeepSeek and Step-3.5-Flash is made by StepFun. 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 Step-3.5-Flash in benchmarks?

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B scores MATH-500: 94.3%, AIME 2024: 83.3%, GPQA: 62.1%, LiveCodeBench: 57.2%. Step-3.5-Flash scores AIME 2025: 97.3%, Tau-bench: 88.2%, LiveCodeBench v6: 86.4%, IMO-AnswerBench: 85.4%, SWE-Bench Verified: 74.4%.

Is DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B cheaper than Step-3.5-Flash?

Step-3.5-Flash is 1.2x cheaper for input tokens. DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B costs $0.12/M input and $0.18/M output via deepinfra. Step-3.5-Flash costs $0.10/M input and $0.40/M output via stepfun.

What are the context window sizes for DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B and Step-3.5-Flash?

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B supports 128K tokens and Step-3.5-Flash supports 66K 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 Step-3.5-Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (13.1 vs 37.1), context window (128K vs 66K), input pricing ($0.12 vs $0.10/M), licensing (MIT vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B and Step-3.5-Flash?

DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B is developed by DeepSeek and Step-3.5-Flash is developed by StepFun.

Related comparisons