DeepSeek V3.1 vs Qwen 2.5 VL 72B

Compare DeepSeek V3.1 and Qwen 2.5 VL 72B: pricing, performance, context window, latency, and best use cases. Side-by-side comparison on XALEN.

Updated 2026-05-21 · By Abhishek Raj · Our methodology

All DeepSeek models All Alibaba models What is an LLM API? Python Quickstart What is inference?
Feature DeepSeek V3.1 Qwen 2.5 VL 72B
CategoryOpen SourceVision
Parameters685B (37B active)72B
Context Window128K128K
Input Price$0.06/1M tokens$0.05/1M tokens
Output Price$0.10/1M tokens$0.10/1M tokens
Latency~400ms~400ms

Choose DeepSeek V3.1 when:

  • ✓ Production apps
  • ✓ Content generation
  • ✓ Multi-language
Key Strengths:

Improved quality, Better safety, Stronger multilingual

Choose Qwen 2.5 VL 72B when:

  • ✓ Document analysis
  • ✓ Chart reading
  • ✓ Visual Q&A
Key Strengths:

Vision + language, Strong Asian text OCR, Good reasoning

Verdict: DeepSeek V3.1 vs Qwen 2.5 VL 72B

For cost efficiency, Qwen 2.5 VL 72B wins at $0.05/1M input tokens. For speed, Qwen 2.5 VL 72B is faster at ~400ms. DeepSeek V3.1 excels at Production apps while Qwen 2.5 VL 72B is better for Document analysis. Both are available on XALEN through a single API — try them in the Playground to see which fits your workload.

Detailed Analysis

Pricing Comparison

DeepSeek V3.1 costs $0.06/1M input tokens and $0.10/1M output tokens. Qwen 2.5 VL 72B costs $0.05 input and $0.10 output. Qwen 2.5 VL 72B is 1.2x cheaper on input tokens. XALEN offers batch processing at 50% discount on both models.

Performance & Context

DeepSeek V3.1 has a 128K context window with ~400ms latency. Qwen 2.5 VL 72B offers 128K context at ~400ms. Both have identical context windows.

Best For

DeepSeek V3.1 (Open Source) is optimized for: Production apps, Content generation, Multi-language. Qwen 2.5 VL 72B (Vision) works best for: Document analysis, Chart reading, Visual Q&A.

Try Both on XALEN

Both models are available through XALEN's OpenAI-compatible API. Switch between them by changing the model parameter:

from xalen import XALEN

client = XALEN(api_key="xln_test_YOUR_KEY")

# Use DeepSeek V3.1
response_a = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="deepseek-v3-1",
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Your question here"}]
)

# Use Qwen 2.5 VL 72B
response_b = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="qwen-2-5-vl-72b",
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Your question here"}]
)

Start Building with XALEN

200+ AI models. One API. Pay-as-you-go.

Get API Key Try in Playground

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better, DeepSeek V3.1 or Qwen 2.5 VL 72B?

DeepSeek V3.1 (Open Source, 685B (37B active)) offers Improved quality. Qwen 2.5 VL 72B (Vision, 72B) offers Vision + language. Choose DeepSeek V3.1 for Production apps or Qwen 2.5 VL 72B for Document analysis.

How much does DeepSeek V3.1 cost vs Qwen 2.5 VL 72B?

DeepSeek V3.1: $0.06/1M input, $0.10/1M output. Qwen 2.5 VL 72B: $0.05/1M input, $0.10/1M output. Both available on XALEN with batch processing at 50% discount.

Can I use both models on XALEN?

Yes. XALEN provides 200+ models through a single OpenAI-compatible API. Switch between DeepSeek V3.1 and Qwen 2.5 VL 72B by changing the model parameter. No code changes needed.

Related Comparisons

DeepSeek V3.1 vs Vedika Vision DeepSeek V3.1 vs Gemma 3 27B DeepSeek V3.1 vs Llama 4 Scout DeepSeek V3.1 vs Llama 4 Maverick DeepSeek V3.1 vs Llama 3.3 70B DeepSeek V3.1 vs Llama 3.1 405B

Last updated: 2026-05-21. Pricing and specifications may change. Check pricing page for latest rates.