Model Comparison
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning)
vs. Qwen3 32B (Non-reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · DeepSeek, Alibaba
Recommended Pick
De V4 Flash (Non-reasoning) 14 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning)
100.0 value score
38.4 reasoning / $0.18/1M
Lowest Price
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning)
$0.14/1M input price
Best Reasoning
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning)
38.4 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning)
35.2 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning) is 1.1x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3 32B (Non-reasoning).
Speed gap
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning) generates about 1.1x as many tokens per second as Qwen3 32B (Non-reasoning).
Reasoning gap
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning) leads Qwen3 32B (Non-reasoning) by 5.7 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning) wins 14 measurable categories, including Value, Input price, Output price, Blended price.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning)
DeepSeek
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3 32B (Non-reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick De V4 Flash (Non-reasoning) | Al Qwen3 32B (Non-reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.14/1M | $0.15/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.28/1M | $0.59/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.18/1M | $0.26/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | DeepSeek | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Apr 24, 2026 | Apr 28, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 91.2 tok/s | 86.8 tok/s |
| TTFT | 1068ms | 1148ms |
| Latency | 1068ms | 1148ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 57.4 |
| Reasoning Score | 38.4 | 32.7 |
| Intelligence | 36.5 | 14.5 |
| Coding | 35.2 | — |
| Math | — | 19.7 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 71.6% | 53.5% |
| MMLU Pro | — | 72.7% |
| HLE | 7.0% | 4.3% |
| LiveCodeBench | — | 28.8% |
| MATH 500 | — | 86.9% |
| AIME 2025 | — | 19.7% |
| AIME (Original) | — | 30.3% |
| SciCode | 37.3% | 28.0% |
| LCR | 33.3% | 0.0% |
| IFBench | 47.2% | 31.5% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 94.4% | — |
| TerminalBench Hard | 34.1% | — |
Key Takeaways
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning) offers the best value at $0.14/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 38.4 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning) reaches a 35.2 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
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
Qwen3 32B (Non-reasoning)
- General-purpose AI
- Versatile applications
