Qwen2.5-Coder 32B vs DeepSeek-R1-Distill 32B
Two open-weight models, head to head — task-by-task quality, memory needs, speed and license. Scores are 0-100 from public evaluations; speed and VRAM are computed for a common 12GB card.
Verdict
The DeepSeek-R1-Distill 32B is the stronger all-rounder (86 vs 85 average), but pick Qwen2.5-Coder 32B for coding and DeepSeek-R1-Distill 32B for reasoning. Licenses differ: Qwen2.5-Coder 32B is Apache-2.0, DeepSeek-R1-Distill 32B is MIT.
Specs
| Qwen2.5-Coder 32B | DeepSeek-R1-Distill 32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Parameters | 32B | 32B |
| Context | 128K | 128K |
| VRAM (Q4) | 22 GB | 22 GB |
| Speed on RTX 4070 | 2.7 tok/s | 2.7 tok/s |
| License | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Released | 2024-11 | 2025-01 |
Task-by-task quality
coding
92
86
reasoning
82
92
math
84
94
chat
82
84
multilingual
82
80
agent
86
82
Average8586
Qwen2.5-Coder 32BDeepSeek-R1-Distill 32B
Can your GPU run them?
Frequently asked
Is Qwen2.5-Coder 32B or DeepSeek-R1-Distill 32B better?
Overall the DeepSeek-R1-Distill 32B edges it on average quality (86 vs 85 across six task areas), but it's use-case dependent — Qwen2.5-Coder 32B leads on coding, while DeepSeek-R1-Distill 32B leads on reasoning.
Which is better for coding, Qwen2.5-Coder 32B or DeepSeek-R1-Distill 32B?
Qwen2.5-Coder 32B — it scores 92/100 for coding vs 86/100.
Which needs more VRAM?
Both are 32B, so their memory needs are similar (~22 GB at Q4).
Which is faster?
On a 12GB RTX 4070 at Q4, Qwen2.5-Coder 32B runs at ~2.7 tok/s and DeepSeek-R1-Distill 32B at ~2.7 tok/s.
More model comparisons
Run the interactive advisor
Auto-detect your exact hardware and get personalised picks, speed & memory.