Model Comparison
R1 Distill Qwen 14B
vs. Gemini 3.5 Flash (high)
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · DeepSeek, Google
Recommended Pick
Go Gemini 3.5 Flash (high) 8 metric wins Strongest on: Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence
Lowest Price
R1 Distill Qwen 14B
$0.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Gemini 3.5 Flash (high)
61.1 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Gemini 3.5 Flash (high)
70.1 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Price gap
R1 Distill Qwen 14B is ∞x cheaper on input tokens than Gemini 3.5 Flash (high).
Reasoning gap
Gemini 3.5 Flash (high) leads R1 Distill Qwen 14B by 13.2 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Gemini 3.5 Flash (high) wins 8 measurable categories, including Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence, GPQA.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
R1 Distill Qwen 14B
DeepSeek
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Gemini 3.5 Flash (high)
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Chat with leading AI models
Use Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini alongside with EU-Hosted Models like Deepseek, Qwen & Kimi.
EU-hosted inference
Servers in Germany & Finland. Designed to meet strict GDPR and ISO 27001 compliance requirements.
Full Comparison
| Metric | De R1 Distill Qwen 14B | Top Pick Go Gemini 3.5 Flash (high) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.00/1M | $1.50/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.00/1M | $9.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | — | $3.38/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | DeepSeek | |
| Release Date | Jan 20, 2025 | May 19, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | 228.8 tok/s |
| TTFT | — | 13031ms |
| Latency | — | 13031ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | — | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 47.9 | 61.1 |
| Intelligence | 9.8 | 50.2 |
| Coding | — | 70.1 |
| Math | 55.7 | — |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 48.4% | 92.2% |
| MMLU Pro | 74.0% | — |
| HLE | 4.4% | 41.0% |
| LiveCodeBench | 37.6% | — |
| MATH 500 | 94.9% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 55.7% | — |
| AIME (Original) | 66.7% | — |
| SciCode | 23.9% | 53.1% |
| LCR | 7.0% | 69.3% |
| IFBench | 22.1% | 76.3% |
| TAU-bench v2 | — | 95.3% |
| TerminalBench Hard | — | 40.9% |
Key Takeaways
R1 Distill Qwen 14B offers the best value at $0.00/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Gemini 3.5 Flash (high) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 61.1 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Gemini 3.5 Flash (high) reaches a 70.1 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
R1 Distill Qwen 14B
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
Gemini 3.5 Flash (high)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
Recommended Comparisons
Popular alternatives 
