Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
DeepSeek V3.2
60
Qwen3.5 397B
66
Verified leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V3.2 unranked · Qwen3.5 397B #11
Pick Qwen3.5 397B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. DeepSeek V3.2 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.
Coding
+0.6 difference
DeepSeek V3.2
Qwen3.5 397B
$0 / $0
$0 / $0
35 t/s
96 t/s
3.75s
2.44s
128K
128K
Pick Qwen3.5 397B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. DeepSeek V3.2 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.
Qwen3.5 397B is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 66 to 60. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Qwen3.5 397B is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 66 to 60.
DeepSeek V3.2 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 60.9 versus 60.3. Qwen3.5 397B stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.