DeepSeek R1 vs Qwen 3.5 397B
Complete pricing and performance comparison between DeepSeek's DeepSeek R1 and Alibaba's Qwen 3.5 397B.
Quick Verdict
Cheaper
Qwen 3.5 397B
2.3x cheaper input, 1.5x cheaper output
Larger Context
DeepSeek R1
128K vs 128K
Pricing Comparison
| Spec | DeepSeek R1 | Qwen 3.5 397B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Alibaba | |
| Input / 1M tokens | $1.35 | $0.6 | Qwen 3.5 397B is 56% more expensive |
| Output / 1M tokens | $5.4 | $3.6 | Qwen 3.5 397B is 33% more expensive |
| Context Window | 128K | 128K | Same |
| Max Output | 33K | 33K |
Performance Benchmarks
| Metric | DeepSeek R1 | Qwen 3.5 397B | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quality Index | 27 | -- | N/A |
| Value (Quality/$) | 20.1 | -- | Higher = better value |
Benchmark data from Artificial Analysis. Quality Index is a composite score across reasoning, coding, and knowledge tasks.
Cost at Scale
Estimated cost at different usage levels (3:1 input-to-output token ratio, typical for chat).
| Usage | DeepSeek R1 | Qwen 3.5 397B | Savings |
|---|---|---|---|
Single request 1K in / 300 out | $0.0030 | $0.0017 | Qwen 3.5 397B saves $0.0013 |
10 requests 10K in / 3K out | $0.030 | $0.017 | Qwen 3.5 397B saves $0.013 |
100 requests 100K in / 30K out | $0.297 | $0.168 | Qwen 3.5 397B saves $0.129 |
1,000 requests 1M in / 300K out | $2.97 | $1.68 | Qwen 3.5 397B saves $1.29 |
10,000 requests 10M in / 3M out | $29.70 | $16.80 | Qwen 3.5 397B saves $12.90 |
1M requests/mo 1B in / 300M out | $2970.00 | $1680.00 | Qwen 3.5 397B saves $1290.00 |
Pros & Cons
DeepSeek R1 Strengths
Part of the DeepSeek ecosystem
Qwen 3.5 397B Strengths
- +Cheaper input tokens
- +Cheaper output tokens
When to Use Each Model
Choose DeepSeek R1 for
- →Projects already integrated with DeepSeek's ecosystem
Choose Qwen 3.5 397B for
- →Budget-conscious projects where cost is the primary factor
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek R1 or Qwen 3.5 397B?
For input tokens, Qwen 3.5 397B is 2.3x cheaper at $0.6/1M tokens. For output tokens, Qwen 3.5 397B is 1.5x cheaper at $3.6/1M tokens. At typical usage (1M input + 300K output), DeepSeek R1 costs $2.97 vs Qwen 3.5 397B at $1.68.
What's the context window difference?
DeepSeek R1 supports 128K context (128,000 tokens), while Qwen 3.5 397B supports 128K (128,000 tokens). Qwen 3.5 397B can handle 1x more context in a single request.
Which model has better benchmarks?
When should I choose DeepSeek R1 over Qwen 3.5 397B?
Choose DeepSeek R1 when you need: a DeepSeek ecosystem model. Choose Qwen 3.5 397B when you need: Cheaper input tokens, Cheaper output tokens.
How much would 10,000 API requests cost?
At 1K input + 300 output tokens per request (typical chat): DeepSeek R1 = $29.70, Qwen 3.5 397B = $16.80. At 10K input + 1K output per request (longer conversations): DeepSeek R1 = $189.00, Qwen 3.5 397B = $96.00.