Model comparison
DeepSeek-R1 vs Hunyuan Vision 1.5
DeepSeek-R1 and Hunyuan Vision 1.5 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (42.3 vs 43.1), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 8 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeek
TencentSummary
- They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek-R1 scores higher in 4 categories and Hunyuan Vision 1.5 in 2 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Hunyuan Vision 1.5 leads 28.9 to 18.6.
Side by side
| DeepSeek-R1 | Hunyuan Vision 1.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Tencent |
| Noometry Index | 42.3 | 43.1 |
| Released | 2025-01-20 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 164K | — |
| Max output | 64K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.50 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.15 | — |
| Results tracked | 52 | 9 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding DeepSeek-R1 leads
DeepSeek-R1: 46.3 (#68), Hunyuan Vision 1.5: 41.8 (#119)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Hunyuan Vision 1.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1427 | 1418 |
| Aider Polyglot | 71.4% | — |
| SciCode | 35.7% | — |
| WeirdML | 41.6% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 66.7% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 804.12 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.7 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
DeepSeek-R1: 30.7 (#75), Hunyuan Vision 1.5: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Hunyuan Vision 1.5 |
|---|---|---|
| DeepResearch Bench | 35.1% | — |
| BALROG | 34.9% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 53.8% | — |
Reasoning Hunyuan Vision 1.5 leads
DeepSeek-R1: 18.6 (#278), Hunyuan Vision 1.5: 28.9 (#97)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Hunyuan Vision 1.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1416 | 1416 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 1.3% | — |
| SimpleBench | 40.8% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 69.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 21.2% | — |
| CritPt | 1.1% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 83.2% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 69.8% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 141.29 | — |
| ForecastBench | 60 | — |
| LiveBench | 71.6% | — |
Math Not comparable
DeepSeek-R1: 43.8 (#79), Hunyuan Vision 1.5: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Hunyuan Vision 1.5 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 66.4% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 42.4% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 80.7% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1400 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 96.6% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
DeepSeek-R1: 44.5 (#87), Hunyuan Vision 1.5: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Hunyuan Vision 1.5 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 76.3% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 79.3% | — |
| Confabulations | 12.7% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.3% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 66.6% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1394 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
DeepSeek-R1: —, Hunyuan Vision 1.5: 35.7 (#84)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Hunyuan Vision 1.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1180 |
Multilingual DeepSeek-R1 leads
DeepSeek-R1: 52.4 (#85), Hunyuan Vision 1.5: 50.3 (#125)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Hunyuan Vision 1.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1412 | 1382 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1442 | — |
| LMArena French | 1417 | — |
| LMArena German | 1404 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1391 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1360 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1423 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1411 | — |
Instruction Following Hunyuan Vision 1.5 leads
DeepSeek-R1: 72.0 (#143), Hunyuan Vision 1.5: 73.7 (#117)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Hunyuan Vision 1.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1382 | 1397 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 80.5% | — |
| IFEval | 78.4% | — |
Long Context DeepSeek-R1 leads
DeepSeek-R1: 45.4 (#36), Hunyuan Vision 1.5: 42.9 (#115)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Hunyuan Vision 1.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1391 | 1404 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 75% | — |
Writing & Preference DeepSeek-R1 leads
DeepSeek-R1: 61.4 (#88), Hunyuan Vision 1.5: 60.1 (#100)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-R1 | Hunyuan Vision 1.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1428 | 1405 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1405 | 1388 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1405 | 1422 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 83% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1500 | — |
| WildBench | 82.8% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 48.5% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek-R1 better than Hunyuan Vision 1.5?
DeepSeek-R1 and Hunyuan Vision 1.5 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (42.3 vs 43.1), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is DeepSeek-R1 or Hunyuan Vision 1.5 better for coding?
DeepSeek-R1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.3 versus 41.8 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-R1 and Hunyuan Vision 1.5 share?
8 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-R1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Hunyuan Vision 1.5 has 9.