Model comparison
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has enough public results to be ranked (#320); DeepSeek Coder 1.3B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeek
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek Coder 1.3B scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct in 1 category; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads 36.5 to 31.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 29.6% for DeepSeek Coder 1.3B and 46.1% for Qwen2.5 7B Instruct.
Side by side
| DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 35.0 | 29.0 |
| Released | 2023-11-02 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.17 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.70 |
| Results tracked | 9 | 15 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen2.5 7B Instruct leads
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: 31.2 (#287), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 36.5 (#208)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 22.8% | 37.6% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 29.6% | 46.1% |
| HumanEval+ | 60.4% | — |
| MBPP+ | 54.8% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.8 (#124)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | — | 7.8% |
Reasoning Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.8 (#322)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 63.6 | 118.51 |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| DTBench | — | 47.7% |
| LMCA | — | 6.4% |
| WinoGrande | 53.3% | — |
Math Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 12.6 (#306)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 2.5% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 29.4% |
| GSM8K | 4.4% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#286)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU | 25.8% | 72.9% |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 35.5% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 53.9% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 34.1% |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 25.4% | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.2 (#231)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | — | 74.1% |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#195)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| WildBench | — | 73.1% |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek Coder 1.3B better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has enough public results to be ranked (#320); DeepSeek Coder 1.3B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Is DeepSeek Coder 1.3B or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.5 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek Coder 1.3B and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?
4 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek Coder 1.3B has 9 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.