Skip to main content

Model comparison

DeepSeek V3.2 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 15 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

55.3/100
Margin
3.9pts
← winning
51.36/100
0 category wins2 category wins

Verified leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V3.2 unranked; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B #31

BenchAlign evidence: DeepSeek V3.2 supported; Qwen3.6-35B-A3B estimated. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. DeepSeek V3.2 and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B share 15 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 5 results are unique to DeepSeek V3.2; 43 to Qwen3.6-35B-A3B.

Updated July 15, 2026
Shared results
15
DeepSeek V3.2 only
5
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B only
43
Comparable categories
2 / 8

Pick Qwen3.6-35B-A3B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. DeepSeek V3.2 only becomes the better choice if you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 15 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 59 to 54. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 88.2 against 17.1.

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is the reasoning model in the pair, while DeepSeek V3.2 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 128K for DeepSeek V3.2.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for DeepSeek V3.2 and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
CategoryDeepSeek V3.2ΔQwen3.6-35B-A3B
MathDeepSeek V3.217.1Margin 71.1Qwen3.6-35B-A3B88.2
CodingDeepSeek V3.260.9Margin 12.9Qwen3.6-35B-A3B73.8
AgenticDeepSeek V3.2Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.6-35B-A3B51.5
KnowledgeDeepSeek V3.2Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.6-35B-A3B51.8
MultimodalDeepSeek V3.2Not measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.6-35B-A3B76.3

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricDeepSeek V3.2Qwen3.6-35B-A3BComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensDeepSeek V3.2$0.28 input / $0.42 outputQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondDeepSeek V3.235 tok/sQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenDeepSeek V3.23.75 sQwen3.6-35B-A3BNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensDeepSeek V3.2128KQwen3.6-35B-A3B262KQwen3.6-35B-A3B lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
Claw-EvalSource 40.2%68.7%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
VITA-BenchSource 18.5%35.6%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
τ²-bench resultsSource 78.9%95.3%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
Gert LabsSource 29.57%42.65%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 51.5%Not comparable
QwenClawBenchSource 52.6%Not comparable
QwenWebBenchSource 1397Not comparable
τ³-bench resultsSource 67.2%Not comparable
DeepPlanningSource 25.9%Not comparable
ToolathlonSource 26.9%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 62.8%Not comparable
WideResearchSource 60.1%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 21.4%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 27.4%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1049Not comparable
CodingQwen3.6-35B-A3B wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
SWE-RebenchSource 60.9%Not comparable
React Native EvalsSource 71.5%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench HardSource 32.6%34.8%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
AA-SciCodeSource 38.7%35.8%DeepSeek V3.2 leads
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 73.4%Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource 67.2%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 49.5%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 51.5%Not comparable
LiveCodeBenchSource 80.4%Not comparable
NL2RepoSource 29.4%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 41.9%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
AA-LCRSource 39.0%63.7%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
CritPtSource 0.9%0.3%DeepSeek V3.2 leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 24.7%31.6%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 75.1%84.1%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
AA-HLESource 10.5%20.2%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -46.7%-21.4%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 24.2%18.9%DeepSeek V3.2 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 93.5%49.7%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
MMLU-ProSource 85.2%Not comparable
SuperGPQASource 64.7%Not comparable
C-EvalSource 90%Not comparable
GPQASource 86%Not comparable
HLESource 21.4%Not comparable
MathQwen3.6-35B-A3B wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 22.100%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 2.100%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2025Source 90.7%Not comparable
HMMT Nov 2025Source 89.1%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source 83.6%Not comparable
MMAnswerBenchSource 78.9%Not comparable
AIME26Source 92.7%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1208Not comparable
MMMUSource 81.7%Not comparable
MMMU-ProSource 75.3%Not comparable
RealWorldQASource 85.3%Not comparable
OmniDocBench 1.5Source 89.9%Not comparable
CharXivSource 78%Not comparable
SimpleVQASource 58.9%Not comparable
CC-OCRSource 81.9%Not comparable
AI2D_TESTSource 92.7%Not comparable
RefCOCO (avg)Source 92.0%Not comparable
ODINW13Source 50.8%Not comparable
Video-MME (with subtitle)Source 86.6%Not comparable
Video-MME (w/o subtitle)Source 82.5%Not comparable
VideoMMMUSource 83.7%Not comparable
MLVU (M-Avg)Source 86.2%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 75.0%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Qwen3.6-35B-A3BResult
AA-IFBenchSource 49.0%64.4%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Which is better, DeepSeek V3.2 or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 59 to 54.

Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V3.2 or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 73.8 versus 60.9. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, DeepSeek V3.2 or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 88.2 versus 17.1. DeepSeek V3.2 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 15, 2026

The AI models change fast. We track them for you.

A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.