Noometry

Model comparison

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus vs Qwen3 8B

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 33.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus DeepSeek

43.1

Rank #97 Confirmed

Qwen3 8B Alibaba (Qwen)

33.7

Rank #238 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen3 8B in 0 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus leads 26.4 to 16.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 81.3% for DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus and 59.7% for Qwen3 8B.
  • Qwen3 8B is cheaper at $0.18 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $0.27 / $1 for DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus.
  • DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus accepts more context: 164K tokens versus 131K.

Side by side

DeepSeek-V3.1-TerminusQwen3 8B
ProviderDeepSeekAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index43.133.7
Released2025-09-222025-04
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window164K131K
Max output147K8K
Input $ / M tokens$0.27$0.18
Output $ / M tokens$1$0.70
Results tracked1611

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

Category by category

Coding DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus leads

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 42.0 (#113), Qwen3 8B: 34.0 (#248)

BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1-TerminusQwen3 8B
SciCode40.6%22.6%
LMArena Coding1426—
ALE-Bench745.17—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: —, Qwen3 8B: 30.2 (#78)

BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1-TerminusQwen3 8B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—42.6%

Reasoning DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus leads

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 26.4 (#133), Qwen3 8B: 16.6 (#303)

BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1-TerminusQwen3 8B
CritPt1.7%0%
DTBench81.3%59.7%
LMCA28.6%8.8%
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.4%—
Chess Puzzles—5%
LMArena Hard Prompts1426—
Epoch Capabilities Index—136.17

Math DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus leads

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 38.5 (#137), Qwen3 8B: 34.9 (#191)

BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1-TerminusQwen3 8B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—56.1%
LMArena Math1402—

Knowledge Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: —, Qwen3 8B: 36.1 (#173)

BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1-TerminusQwen3 8B
GPQA Diamond—56.8%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—4.8%

Multilingual Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 52.1 (#92), Qwen3 8B: —

BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1-TerminusQwen3 8B
LMArena Non-English1407—
LMArena Russian1436—

Instruction Following Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 74.0 (#106), Qwen3 8B: —

BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1-TerminusQwen3 8B
LMArena Instruction Following1404—

Long Context DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus leads

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 43.4 (#97), Qwen3 8B: 37.9 (#210)

BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1-TerminusQwen3 8B
Fiction.LiveBench—62.1%
LMArena Longer Query1421—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 61.0 (#92), Qwen3 8B: —

BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1-TerminusQwen3 8B
LMArena Text1419—
LMArena Creative Writing1403—
LMArena Multi-Turn1411—

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus better than Qwen3 8B?

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 33.7 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus or Qwen3 8B?

Qwen3 8B is cheaper. It lists at $0.18 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus lists at $0.27 and $1.

Is DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus or Qwen3 8B better for coding?

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.0 versus 34.0 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus does, with 164K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus and Qwen3 8B share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus has 16 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 8B has 11.

Related comparisons

Go deeper