DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25) vs Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning)
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25) by DeepSeek or Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) scores 10.0 points higher (21.4 vs 11.4) but costs 2.5× as much to run the benchmark ($1145 vs $461; premium vs mid-range cost classes). Pick Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25).
| Metric | DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25) | Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 11.4 | 21.4 | +87.7% Qwen3.6 27B (Reasonin… is 87.7% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $460.74 | $1,145.36 | +148.6% Qwen3.6 27B (Reasonin… is 2.5× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 18.69s | 111.41s | +496.1% Qwen3.6 27B (Reasonin… is 496.1% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $4.00 | $0.60 / $3.60 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) vs DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25): 87.7% more intelligence, 148.6% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 496.1% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
- Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25)Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning)Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-r1-0120/qwen3-6-27b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-r1-0120/qwen3-6-27b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill