DeepSeek R1 0528 vs Qwen: Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
Compare DeepSeek R1 0528 by DeepSeek against Qwen: Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 by Qwen, in 11 community votes, deepseek r1 0528 wins 78% of head-to-head duels, context windows of 164K vs 131K, tested across 54 shared challenges. Updated April 2026.
Which is better, DeepSeek R1 0528 or Qwen: Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507?
DeepSeek R1 0528 is the better choice overall, winning 78% of 11 blind community votes on Rival. DeepSeek R1 0528 costs $0/M input tokens vs $0.11/M for Qwen: Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507. Context windows: 164K vs 131K tokens. Compare their real outputs side by side below.
Key Differences Between DeepSeek R1 0528 and Qwen: Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
DeepSeek R1 0528 is made by deepseek while Qwen: Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 is from qwen. DeepSeek R1 0528 has a 164K token context window compared to Qwen: Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507's 131K. On pricing, DeepSeek R1 0528 costs $0/M input tokens vs $0.11/M for Qwen: Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507. In community voting, In 11 community votes, DeepSeek R1 0528 wins 78% of head-to-head duels.
In 11 community votes, DeepSeek R1 0528 wins 78% of head-to-head duels. DeepSeek R1 0528 leads in Image Generation. Based on blind community voting from the Rival open dataset of 11+ human preference judgments for this pair.
Pick DeepSeek R1 0528. In 11 blind votes, DeepSeek R1 0528 wins 78% of the time. That's not luck.
DeepSeek R1 0528 particularly excels in Image Generation.
Style Comparison
Qwen: Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 uses 53.9x more emoji
vsAsk them anything yourself
Some models write identically. You are paying for the brand.
178 models fingerprinted across 32 writing dimensions. Free research.
185x
price gap between models that write identically
178
models
12
clone pairs
32
dimensions
279 AI models invented the same fake scientist.
We read every word. 250 models. 2.14 million words. This is what we found.
