Model comparison

DeepSeek-R1 vs ERNIE 5.1

ERNIE 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 42.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek-R1 DeepSeek

42.3

Rank #115 Confirmed

ERNIE 5.1 Baidu

43.8

Rank #83 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek-R1 scores higher in 4 categories and ERNIE 5.1 in 4 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in instruction following, where ERNIE 5.1 leads 76.7 to 72.0.

Side by side

DeepSeek-R1 and ERNIE 5.1 specifications
DeepSeek-R1ERNIE 5.1
ProviderDeepSeekBaidu
Noometry Index42.343.8
Released2025-01-20—
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window164K—
Max output64K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.50—
Output $ / M tokens$2.15—
Results tracked5219

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

Category by category

Coding DeepSeek-R1 leads

DeepSeek-R1: 46.3 (#68), ERNIE 5.1: 44.0 (#76)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1ERNIE 5.1
LMArena Coding14271488
Aider Polyglot71.4%—
SciCode35.7%—
WeirdML41.6%—
LiveBench Coding66.7%—
ALE-Bench804.12—
AlgoTune1.7—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

DeepSeek-R1: 30.7 (#75), ERNIE 5.1: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1ERNIE 5.1
DeepResearch Bench35.1%—
BALROG34.9%—
LMArena Search—1227
METR Time Horizons53.8%—

Reasoning ERNIE 5.1 leads

DeepSeek-R1: 18.6 (#278), ERNIE 5.1: 21.9 (#211)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1ERNIE 5.1
LMArena Hard Prompts14161481
ARC-AGI-21.3%—
SimpleBench40.8%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark69.4%—
NYT Connections (extended)—23.4%
ARC-AGI-121.2%—
CritPt1.1%—
LiveBench Reasoning83.2%—
LiveBench Data Analysis69.8%—
Epoch Capabilities Index141.29—
ForecastBench60—
LiveBench71.6%—

Math DeepSeek-R1 leads

DeepSeek-R1: 43.8 (#79), ERNIE 5.1: 40.3 (#92)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1ERNIE 5.1
LMArena Math14001481
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202566.4%—
Omni-MATH42.4%—
LiveBench Math80.7%—
MATH Level 596.6%—

Knowledge DeepSeek-R1 leads

DeepSeek-R1: 44.5 (#87), ERNIE 5.1: 41.9 (#102)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1ERNIE 5.1
LMArena Expert13941492
GPQA Diamond76.3%—
MMLU-Pro79.3%—
Confabulations12.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate11.3%—
GPQA (HELM)66.6%—

Multilingual ERNIE 5.1 leads

DeepSeek-R1: 52.4 (#85), ERNIE 5.1: 55.5 (#29)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1ERNIE 5.1
LMArena Non-English14121454
LMArena Chinese14421508
LMArena French14171488
LMArena German14041470
LMArena Japanese13911422
LMArena Korean13601427
LMArena Russian14231459
LMArena Spanish14111473

Instruction Following ERNIE 5.1 leads

DeepSeek-R1: 72.0 (#143), ERNIE 5.1: 76.7 (#37)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1ERNIE 5.1
LMArena Instruction Following13821460
LiveBench Instruction Following80.5%—
IFEval78.4%—

Long Context Too close to call

DeepSeek-R1: 45.4 (#36), ERNIE 5.1: 44.7 (#59)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1ERNIE 5.1
LMArena Longer Query13911462
Fiction.LiveBench75%—

Writing & Preference ERNIE 5.1 leads

DeepSeek-R1: 61.4 (#88), ERNIE 5.1: 65.1 (#52)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1ERNIE 5.1
LMArena Text14281468
LMArena Creative Writing14051441
LMArena Multi-Turn14051471
Short-Story Creative Writing83%—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1500—
WildBench82.8%—
LiveBench Language48.5%—

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek-R1 better than ERNIE 5.1?

ERNIE 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 42.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is DeepSeek-R1 or ERNIE 5.1 better for coding?

DeepSeek-R1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.3 versus 44.0 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-R1 and ERNIE 5.1 share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-R1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and ERNIE 5.1 has 19.

Related comparisons

Go deeper