DeepSeek R1 0528 vs Qwen3 Coder Flash

Compare DeepSeek R1 0528 by DeepSeek against Qwen3 Coder Flash by Qwen, context windows of 164K vs 128K, tested across 54 shared challenges. Updated April 2026.

Which is better, DeepSeek R1 0528 or Qwen3 Coder Flash?

DeepSeek R1 0528 and Qwen3 Coder Flash are both competitive models. DeepSeek R1 0528 costs $0/M input tokens vs $0.3/M for Qwen3 Coder Flash. Context windows: 164K vs 128K tokens. Compare their real outputs side by side below.

Key Differences Between DeepSeek R1 0528 and Qwen3 Coder Flash

DeepSeek R1 0528 is made by deepseek while Qwen3 Coder Flash is from qwen. DeepSeek R1 0528 has a 164K token context window compared to Qwen3 Coder Flash's 128K. On pricing, DeepSeek R1 0528 costs $0/M input tokens vs $0.3/M for Qwen3 Coder Flash.

Our Verdict
DeepSeek R1 0528
DeepSeek R1 0528
Qwen3 Coder Flash
Qwen3 Coder FlashRunner-up

No community votes yet. On paper, DeepSeek R1 0528 has the edge — bigger model tier, major provider backing.

Too close to call
Writing DNA

Style Comparison

Similarity
74%

Qwen3 Coder Flash uses 18.4x more transitions

DeepSeek R1 0528
Qwen3 Coder Flash
64%Vocabulary60%
10wSentence Length92w
0.30Hedging0.60
6.8Bold6.1
4.9Lists6.2
0.00Emoji0.00
0.40Headings1.64
0.00Transitions0.18
Based on 4 + 22 text responses
vs

Ask them anything yourself

DeepSeek R1 0528Qwen3 Coder Flash

279 AI models invented the same fake scientist.

We read every word. 250 models. 2.14 million words. This is what we found.

AI Hallucination Index 2026
Free preview13 of 58 slides
FAQ

Common questions