Model comparison

DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14B vs Trinity Large Thinking

Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14B DeepSeek

32.7

Rank #252 Confirmed

Trinity Large Thinking Arcee AI

38.6

Rank #185 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Trinity Large Thinking leads 40.9 to 24.1.

Side by side

DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14B and Trinity Large Thinking specifications
DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14BTrinity Large Thinking
ProviderDeepSeekArcee AI
Noometry Index32.738.6
Released2025-01-202026-04-01
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—262K
Max output—80K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.25
Output $ / M tokens—$0.80
Results tracked724

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

Category by category

Coding DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14B leads

DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14B: 36.9 (#200), Trinity Large Thinking: 34.1 (#244)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14BTrinity Large Thinking
LMArena WebDev—1238
SciCode—36.1%
BigCodeBench Instruct38.1%—
LMArena Coding—1381
BigCodeBench Complete48.4%—

Reasoning DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14B leads

DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14B: 19.2 (#263), Trinity Large Thinking: 16.9 (#298)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14BTrinity Large Thinking
NYT Connections (extended)—16.5%
CritPt—0.9%
Chess Puzzles1%—
Thematic Generalization—41.6%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1350
Surface Evolver Bench—15.6%
Epoch Capabilities Index135.43—

Math Trinity Large Thinking leads

DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14B: 35.5 (#184), Trinity Large Thinking: 37.6 (#149)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14BTrinity Large Thinking
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202550.6%—
LMArena Math—1366
MATH Level 587.1%—

Knowledge Trinity Large Thinking leads

DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14B: 24.1 (#270), Trinity Large Thinking: 40.9 (#113)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14BTrinity Large Thinking
GPQA Diamond44.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—6.9%
LMArena Expert—1360

Multilingual Not comparable

DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14B: —, Trinity Large Thinking: 46.2 (#160)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14BTrinity Large Thinking
LMArena Non-English—1325
LMArena Chinese—1373
LMArena French—1374
LMArena German—1356
LMArena Japanese—1311
LMArena Korean—1306
LMArena Russian—1337
LMArena Spanish—1357

Instruction Following Not comparable

DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14B: —, Trinity Large Thinking: 70.5 (#162)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14BTrinity Large Thinking
LMArena Instruction Following—1334

Long Context Not comparable

DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14B: —, Trinity Large Thinking: 41.3 (#144)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14BTrinity Large Thinking
LMArena Longer Query—1355

Writing & Preference Not comparable

DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14B: —, Trinity Large Thinking: 53.8 (#158)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14BTrinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text—1340
LMArena Creative Writing—1320
LMArena Multi-Turn—1342

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14B better than Trinity Large Thinking?

Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14B or Trinity Large Thinking better for coding?

DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.9 versus 34.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14B and Trinity Large Thinking share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-14B has 7 scored results on Noometry and Trinity Large Thinking has 24.

Related comparisons

Go deeper