Model comparison

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B vs Llama 3.2 1B

Llama 3.2 1B has enough public results to be ranked (#354); DeepSeek Coder 1.3B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B DeepSeek

35.0

Unranked Sparse

Llama 3.2 1B Meta

20.1

Rank #354 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek Coder 1.3B scores higher in 1 category and Llama 3.2 1B in 0 categories; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where DeepSeek Coder 1.3B leads 31.2 to 21.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 29.6% for DeepSeek Coder 1.3B and 11.3% for Llama 3.2 1B.

Side by side

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B and Llama 3.2 1B specifications
DeepSeek Coder 1.3BLlama 3.2 1B
ProviderDeepSeekMeta
Noometry Index35.020.1
Released2023-11-022024-09-24
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—60K
Max output—54K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.027
Output $ / M tokens—$0.20
Results tracked922

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

Category by category

Coding DeepSeek Coder 1.3B leads

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: 31.2 (#287), Llama 3.2 1B: 21.1 (#338)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 1.3BLlama 3.2 1B
BigCodeBench Instruct22.8%8.2%
BigCodeBench Complete29.6%11.3%
LMArena Coding—1070
HumanEval+60.4%—
MBPP+54.8%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Llama 3.2 1B: 14.6 (#150)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 1.3BLlama 3.2 1B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—10.8%
BALROG—6.6%

Reasoning Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Llama 3.2 1B: 16.2 (#308)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 1.3BLlama 3.2 1B
Epoch Capabilities Index63.6101.99
Chess Puzzles—0%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1044
WinoGrande53.3%—

Math Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Llama 3.2 1B: 10.4 (#313)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 1.3BLlama 3.2 1B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—0.6%
LMArena Math—1086
GSM8K4.4%—

Knowledge Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#312)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 1.3BLlama 3.2 1B
GPQA Diamond—23.9%
LMArena Expert—1007
ARC (AI2) Challenge25.4%—
MMLU25.8%—

Multilingual Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Llama 3.2 1B: 23.8 (#292)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 1.3BLlama 3.2 1B
LMArena Non-English—973
LMArena Chinese—959
LMArena German—1014
LMArena Russian—941

Instruction Following Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Llama 3.2 1B: 52.4 (#290)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 1.3BLlama 3.2 1B
LMArena Instruction Following—1031

Long Context Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#274)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 1.3BLlama 3.2 1B
LMArena Longer Query—1050

Writing & Preference Not comparable

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Llama 3.2 1B: 21.3 (#310)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek Coder 1.3BLlama 3.2 1B
LMArena Text—1055
LMArena Creative Writing—1033
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—200
LMArena Multi-Turn—1030

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek Coder 1.3B better than Llama 3.2 1B?

Llama 3.2 1B has enough public results to be ranked (#354); DeepSeek Coder 1.3B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Is DeepSeek Coder 1.3B or Llama 3.2 1B better for coding?

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 31.2 versus 21.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek Coder 1.3B and Llama 3.2 1B share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek Coder 1.3B has 9 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 1B has 22.

Related comparisons

Go deeper