Model comparison
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B vs o1
o1 has enough public results to be ranked (#143); DeepSeek Coder 1.3B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeekSummary
- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek Coder 1.3B scores higher in 0 categories and o1 in 1 category; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where o1 leads 46.1 to 31.2.
- DeepSeek Coder 1.3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | o1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 35.0 | 40.9 |
| Released | 2023-11-02 | 2024-09-12 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 200K |
| Max output | — | 100K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $15 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $60 |
| Results tracked | 9 | 52 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding o1 leads
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: 31.2 (#287), o1: 46.1 (#70)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| HumanEval+ | 60.4% | 89% |
| MBPP+ | 54.8% | 80.2% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 61.7% |
| WeirdML | — | 47.6% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 22.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 69.7% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1367 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 29.6% | — |
| CadEval | — | 56% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, o1: 24.6 (#117)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | — | 10% |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 51.1% |
Reasoning Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, o1: 27.9 (#111)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 63.6 | 141.91 |
| SimpleBench | — | 41.7% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 30.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 15% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 5.7% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 91.6% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1371 |
| DTBench | — | 74.7% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65.5% |
| LMCA | — | 22.3% |
| LiveBench | — | 75.7% |
| WinoGrande | 53.3% | — |
Math Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, o1: 36.1 (#175)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 14.7% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 73.3% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 80.3% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1388 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 94.7% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 9.3% |
| GSM8K | 4.4% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, o1: 41.5 (#110)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 76.8% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 41.1% |
| Confabulations | — | 11.7% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1361 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 25.4% | — |
| MMLU | 25.8% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, o1: 34.2 (#93)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1168 |
| GeoBench | — | 80% |
| VPCT | — | 37% |
| SpatialViz-Bench | — | 41.4% |
Multilingual Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, o1: 48.6 (#142)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1358 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1394 |
| LMArena French | — | 1344 |
| LMArena German | — | 1337 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1346 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1396 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1356 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1345 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, o1: 74.8 (#86)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.5% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1367 |
Long Context Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, o1: 50.3 (#9)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1378 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, o1: 55.6 (#144)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1366 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1348 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 70.2% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1369 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 65.4% |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek Coder 1.3B better than o1?
o1 has enough public results to be ranked (#143); DeepSeek Coder 1.3B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Is DeepSeek Coder 1.3B or o1 better for coding?
o1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.1 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek Coder 1.3B and o1 share?
3 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek Coder 1.3B has 9 scored results on Noometry and o1 has 52.