Model comparison

Claude 2.1 vs DeepSeek-R1

DeepSeek-R1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 5 shared benchmarks.

Claude 2.1 Anthropic

25.2

Rank #345 Reported

DeepSeek-R1 DeepSeek

42.3

Rank #115 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 5 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 2.1 scores higher in 1 category and DeepSeek-R1 in 3 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where DeepSeek-R1 leads 43.8 to 10.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 1.9% for Claude 2.1 and 66.4% for DeepSeek-R1.

Side by side

Claude 2.1 and DeepSeek-R1 specifications
Claude 2.1DeepSeek-R1
ProviderAnthropicDeepSeek
Noometry Index25.242.3
Released2023-11-212025-01-20
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window—164K
Max output—64K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.50
Output $ / M tokens—$2.15
Results tracked752

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding DeepSeek-R1 leads

Claude 2.1: 26.2 (#327), DeepSeek-R1: 46.3 (#68)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1DeepSeek-R1
WeirdML7.1%41.6%
Aider Polyglot—71.4%
SciCode—35.7%
LiveBench Coding—66.7%
LMArena Coding—1427
ALE-Bench—804.12
AlgoTune—1.7

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude 2.1: —, DeepSeek-R1: 30.7 (#75)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1DeepSeek-R1
DeepResearch Bench—35.1%
BALROG—34.9%
METR Time Horizons—53.8%

Reasoning Claude 2.1 leads

Claude 2.1: 21.4 (#221), DeepSeek-R1: 18.6 (#278)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1DeepSeek-R1
Epoch Capabilities Index119.27141.29
ForecastBench54.260
ARC-AGI-2—1.3%
SimpleBench—40.8%
Kagi LLM Benchmark—69.4%
ARC-AGI-1—21.2%
CritPt—1.1%
LiveBench Reasoning—83.2%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1416
DTBench51%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—69.8%
LiveBench—71.6%

Math DeepSeek-R1 leads

Claude 2.1: 10.2 (#315), DeepSeek-R1: 43.8 (#79)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1DeepSeek-R1
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.9%66.4%
Omni-MATH—42.4%
LiveBench Math—80.7%
LMArena Math—1400
MATH Level 5—96.6%

Knowledge DeepSeek-R1 leads

Claude 2.1: 15.4 (#292), DeepSeek-R1: 44.5 (#87)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1DeepSeek-R1
GPQA Diamond33%76.3%
MMLU-Pro—79.3%
Confabulations—12.7%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—11.3%
GPQA (HELM)—66.6%
LMArena Expert—1394
MMLU73.5%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude 2.1: —, DeepSeek-R1: 52.4 (#85)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1DeepSeek-R1
LMArena Non-English—1412
LMArena Chinese—1442
LMArena French—1417
LMArena German—1404
LMArena Japanese—1391
LMArena Korean—1360
LMArena Russian—1423
LMArena Spanish—1411

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude 2.1: —, DeepSeek-R1: 72.0 (#143)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1DeepSeek-R1
LiveBench Instruction Following—80.5%
IFEval—78.4%
LMArena Instruction Following—1382

Long Context Not comparable

Claude 2.1: —, DeepSeek-R1: 45.4 (#36)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1DeepSeek-R1
Fiction.LiveBench—75%
LMArena Longer Query—1391

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude 2.1: —, DeepSeek-R1: 61.4 (#88)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude 2.1DeepSeek-R1
LMArena Text—1428
LMArena Creative Writing—1405
Short-Story Creative Writing—83%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1500
WildBench—82.8%
LMArena Multi-Turn—1405
LiveBench Language—48.5%

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude 2.1 better than DeepSeek-R1?

DeepSeek-R1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude 2.1 or DeepSeek-R1 better for coding?

DeepSeek-R1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.3 versus 26.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude 2.1 and DeepSeek-R1 share?

5 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 2.1 has 7 scored results on Noometry and DeepSeek-R1 has 52.

Related comparisons

Go deeper