Deepseek v4 Pro vs Qwen3 6
Deepseek v4 Pro 
Qwen3 6 Verdict
- Qwen3 6 (max) leads on quality: 61.6 vs 60.4.
- Deepseek v4 Pro (high) is stronger in coding, human preference, maths, reasoning.
- Qwen3 6 (max) is stronger in agents & tools, composite, instruction following, knowledge, long context.
| Metric | Deepseek v4 Pro (high) | Qwen3 6 (max) |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 60.4 | 61.6 |
| Coding score | 59.3 | 58.1 |
| Human preference score | 66.0 | 65.8 |
| Maths score | 66.2 | 64.2 |
| Reasoning score | 65.9 | 63.1 |
| Agents & tools score | – | 67.1 |
| Composite score | – | 59.1 |
| Instruction following score | – | 71.2 |
| Knowledge score | – | 62.6 |
| Long context score | – | 64.5 |
| Blended price $/M | – | $2.96 |
| Output speed | – | 59 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | – | 37.0 s |
| Context window | – | 246k |
| GPQA Diamond | 90.9% | 87.4% |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 95.6% | 91.1% |
| SWE-bench Verified (Epoch) | – | 76.7% |
| SimpleQA Verified | – | 52.0% |
| SimpleBench | – | 63.0% |
| SciCode | 46.4% | – |
| WeirdML | 46.5% | – |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | – | 149.3 |
| LMArena Text | 1462 | 1460 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1482 | 1481 |
| LMArena Coding | 1505 | 1509 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1581 | 1479 |
| AA Intelligence Index | – | 28.4 |
| IFBench | – | 76.6% |
| AA-LCR | – | 80.7% |
| AA-Omniscience | – | 9.2 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | – | 43.9% |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | – | 88.8% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | – | 30.8% |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | – | 95.9% |
| CorpFin | – | 66.5% |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | – | 72.8% |
Data as of 2026-09-13. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Deepseek v4 Pro vs Qwen3 6: questions
- Is Deepseek v4 Pro better than Qwen3 6?
- Qwen3 6 (max) leads on quality: 61.6 vs 60.4. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Qwen3 6 (max) is ahead overall as of 2026-09-13, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Deepseek v4 Pro better than Qwen3 6 for coding?
- Deepseek v4 Pro scores higher in coding (59 vs 58 on the category index, where 50 is average).