+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B vs Llama 4 Scout
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B leads with 14.7% higher average benchmark score. Llama 4 Scout offers 19.7M more tokens in context window than DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B. Both models have similar pricing. Llama 4 Scout supports multimodal inputs. Llama 4 Scout is available on 6 providers. Overall, DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
DeepSeek
DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B was created as a larger distilled variant, designed to transfer more of DeepSeek-R1's reasoning capabilities into a Qwen-based foundation. Built to serve applications requiring enhanced analytical depth, it represents a powerful option in the distilled reasoning model family.
+
+
+
+
Meta
Llama 4 Scout was created as an exploratory variant in the Llama 4 family, designed to investigate new architectures and optimization strategies. Built as part of Meta's commitment to advancing open-source AI, it serves as a testbed for innovations that may inform future model releases.
2 months newer
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B
DeepSeek
2025-01-20
Llama 4 Scout
Meta
2025-04-05
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B
Input:$0.12
Output:$0.18($0.08 cheaper)
+
+
+
+
Llama 4 Scout
Input:$0.08
Output:$0.30
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 2 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B
Average Score:59.7%(+14.7%)
+
+
+
+
Llama 4 Scout
Average Score:45.0%
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B
1 providers
DeepInfra
Throughput: 37 tok/s
Latency: 0.65ms
+
+
+
+
Llama 4 Scout
+
+
+
+
DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B
Avg Score:59.7%(+14.7%)
Providers:1
+
+
+
+
Llama 4 Scout
Avg Score:45.0%
Providers:6