| Signal | R1 Distill Qwen 32B | Delta | SWE-1.5 |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 50 | -- | |
Benchmarks | 35 | +35 | |
Pricing | 100 | 0 | |
Context window size | 72 | +72 | |
Recency | 54 | -39 | |
Output Capacity | 75 | +55 | |
| Overall Result | 3 wins | of 6 | 2 wins |
Score History
37.7
current score
SWE-1.5
right now
40
current score
DeepSeek
Windsurf
SWE-1.5 saves you $43.50/month
That's $522.00/year compared to R1 Distill Qwen 32B at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | R1 Distill Qwen 32B | SWE-1.5 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 38 | 40 | SWE-1.5 |
| Rank | #293 | #291 | SWE-1.5 |
| Quality Rank | #293 | #291 | SWE-1.5 |
| Adoption Rank | #293 | #291 | SWE-1.5 |
| Parameters | 32B | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 33K | -- | -- |
| Pricing | $0.29/$0.29/M | Free | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 50 | 50 | R1 Distill Qwen 32B |
| Benchmarks | 35 | -- | R1 Distill Qwen 32B |
| Pricing | 100 | 100 | SWE-1.5 |
| Context window size | 72 | 0 | R1 Distill Qwen 32B |
| Recency | 54 | 93 | SWE-1.5 |
| Output Capacity | 75 | 20 | R1 Distill Qwen 32B |
Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Learn more about our methodology.
Scores 38/100 (rank #293), placing it in the top -1% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 40/100 (rank #291), placing it in the top 0% of all 290 models tracked.
With only a 2-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal - your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.
Both models are priced similarly, so the decision comes down to quality and features rather than cost.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. SWE-1.5 also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (33K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($0.00/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (40/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
R1 Distill Qwen 32B and SWE-1.5 are extremely close in overall performance (only 2.299999999999997 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.
Best for Quality
R1 Distill Qwen 32B
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
SWE-1.5
100% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
R1 Distill Qwen 32B
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
R1 Distill Qwen 32B
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
R1 Distill Qwen 32B
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by DeepSeek
| Capability | R1 Distill Qwen 32B | SWE-1.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input) | ||
| Function Callingdiffers | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Modediffers | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
DeepSeek
Windsurf
SWE-1.5 saves you $0.8700/month
That's 100% cheaper than R1 Distill Qwen 32B at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | R1 Distill Qwen 32B | SWE-1.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 33K | -- |
| Max Output Tokens | 32,768 | -- |
| Open Source | Yes | No |
| Created | Jan 29, 2025 | Sep 1, 2025 |
SWE-1.5 scores 40/100 (rank #291) compared to R1 Distill Qwen 32B's 38/100 (rank #293), giving it a 2-point advantage. SWE-1.5 is the stronger overall choice, though R1 Distill Qwen 32B may excel in specific areas like certain benchmarks.
R1 Distill Qwen 32B is ranked #293 and SWE-1.5 is ranked #291 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (90%) from MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations, with capabilities and context window as tiebreakers (10%). Scores update hourly.
SWE-1.5 is cheaper at $0.00/M output tokens vs R1 Distill Qwen 32B's $0.29/M output tokens - 290.0x more expensive. Input token pricing: R1 Distill Qwen 32B at $0.29/M vs SWE-1.5 at $0.00/M.
Context window information is available on the individual model pages.