Noometry

Model comparison

Claude 2.1 vs DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.3 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 5 shared benchmarks.

Claude 2.1 Anthropic

25.2

Rank #345 Reported

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp DeepSeek

44.3

Rank #78 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 5 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 2.1 scores higher in 0 categories and DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp in 4 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads 51.7 to 15.4.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 1.9% for Claude 2.1 and 87.8% for DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp.
  • DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude 2.1DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp
ProviderAnthropicDeepSeek
Noometry Index25.244.3
Released2023-11-212025-09-29
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—164K
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.26
Output $ / M tokens—$0.38
Results tracked749

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

Category by category

Coding DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads

Claude 2.1: 26.2 (#327), DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 46.5 (#65)

BenchmarkClaude 2.1DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp
WeirdML7.1%39.5%
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—70%
Aider Polyglot—74.2%
LMArena WebDev—1362
SWE-bench Multilingual—59%
SciCode—38.9%
LMArena Coding—1454

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude 2.1: —, DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 32.7 (#59)

BenchmarkClaude 2.1DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp
Terminal-Bench—39.6%
APEX-Agents—21.3%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—56.7%
TheAgentCompany—42.9%
Vending-Bench 2—1,034

Reasoning Too close to call

Claude 2.1: 21.4 (#221), DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 22.1 (#208)

BenchmarkClaude 2.1DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp
DTBench51%87.7%
Epoch Capabilities Index119.27146.27
ARC-AGI-2—4%
Kagi LLM Benchmark—52.2%
NYT Connections (extended)—36.7%
ARC-AGI-1—57%
CritPt—2.9%
Chess Puzzles—14%
Thematic Generalization—65%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1434
LMCA—29.1%
ForecastBench54.2—

Math DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads

Claude 2.1: 10.2 (#315), DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 41.7 (#87)

BenchmarkClaude 2.1DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.9%87.8%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—57.7%
ProofBench—8%
LMArena Math—1435
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—22.1%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—2.1%

Knowledge DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads

Claude 2.1: 15.4 (#292), DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 51.7 (#66)

BenchmarkClaude 2.1DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp
GPQA Diamond33%83.4%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—5.3%
LMArena Expert—1436
MMLU73.5%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude 2.1: —, DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 52.2 (#90)

BenchmarkClaude 2.1DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp
LMArena Non-English—1409
LMArena Chinese—1461
LMArena French—1433
LMArena German—1440
LMArena Japanese—1374
LMArena Korean—1371
LMArena Russian—1424
LMArena Spanish—1440

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude 2.1: —, DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 74.5 (#93)

BenchmarkClaude 2.1DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp
LMArena Instruction Following—1413

Long Context Not comparable

Claude 2.1: —, DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 47.6 (#16)

BenchmarkClaude 2.1DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp
Fiction.LiveBench—83.3%
CL-bench—13.2%
CL-bench Life—9.5%
LMArena Longer Query—1428

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude 2.1: —, DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 62.4 (#77)

BenchmarkClaude 2.1DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp
LMArena Text—1425
LMArena Creative Writing—1403
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1515
LMArena Multi-Turn—1427

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude 2.1 better than DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp?

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.3 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude 2.1 or DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp better for coding?

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.5 versus 26.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude 2.1 and DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp share?

5 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 2.1 has 7 scored results on Noometry and DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp has 49.

Related comparisons

Go deeper