Model comparison

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B vs Llama 3.1-405B

Llama 3.1-405B has enough public results to be ranked (#288); DeepSeek Coder 1.3B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B DeepSeek

35.0

Unranked Sparse

Llama 3.1-405B Meta

30.7

Rank #288 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek Coder 1.3B scores higher in 0 categories and Llama 3.1-405B in 1 category; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.

Side by side

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B and Llama 3.1-405B specifications
DeepSeek Coder 1.3BLlama 3.1-405B
ProviderDeepSeekMeta
Noometry Index35.030.7
Released2023-11-022024-07-23
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window——
Max output——
Input $ / M tokens——
Output $ / M tokens——
Results tracked942

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

Category by category

Coding Llama 3.1-405B leads

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: 31.2 (#287), Llama 3.1-405B: 33.1 (#262)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 1.3BLlama 3.1-405B
WeirdML—21.4%
BigCodeBench Instruct22.8%—
LMArena Coding—1291
BigCodeBench Complete29.6%—
HumanEval+60.4%—
MBPP+54.8%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 21.0 (#140)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 1.3BLlama 3.1-405B
TheAgentCompany—7.4%
Cybench—7.5%

Reasoning Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 16.8 (#300)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 1.3BLlama 3.1-405B
Epoch Capabilities Index63.6128.75
WinoGrande53.3%89.2%
SimpleBench—23%
Kagi LLM Benchmark—45%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1269
DTBench—61.4%
BIG-Bench Hard—82.9%
ForecastBench—59.9
HellaSwag—89.2%
PIQA—85.9%

Math Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 18.4 (#290)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 1.3BLlama 3.1-405B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—9.7%
Omni-MATH—24.9%
LMArena Math—1281
MATH Level 5—49.8%
GSM8K4.4%—

Knowledge Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 30.4 (#227)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 1.3BLlama 3.1-405B
ARC (AI2) Challenge25.4%95.3%
MMLU25.8%84.5%
GPQA Diamond—50.9%
MMLU-Pro—72.3%
Confabulations—17.6%
GPQA (HELM)—52.2%
LMArena Expert—1243
TriviaQA—82.7%

Multilingual Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 40.7 (#214)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 1.3BLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Non-English—1248
LMArena Chinese—1242
LMArena French—1279
LMArena German—1252
LMArena Japanese—1208
LMArena Korean—1184
LMArena Russian—1265
LMArena Spanish—1260

Instruction Following Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 65.9 (#214)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 1.3BLlama 3.1-405B
IFEval—81.1%
LMArena Instruction Following—1259

Long Context Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 38.4 (#197)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 1.3BLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Longer Query—1266

Writing & Preference Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Llama 3.1-405B: 38.9 (#251)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 1.3BLlama 3.1-405B
LMArena Text—1284
LMArena Creative Writing—1262
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—870
WildBench—78.3%
LMArena Multi-Turn—1297

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek Coder 1.3B better than Llama 3.1-405B?

Llama 3.1-405B has enough public results to be ranked (#288); DeepSeek Coder 1.3B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Is DeepSeek Coder 1.3B or Llama 3.1-405B better for coding?

Llama 3.1-405B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.1 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek Coder 1.3B and Llama 3.1-405B share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek Coder 1.3B has 9 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1-405B has 42.

Related comparisons

Go deeper