Model comparison

DeepSeek-V3.1 vs Qwen3-1.7B

DeepSeek-V3.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 26.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek-V3.1 DeepSeek

42.2

Rank #106 Confirmed

Qwen3-1.7B Alibaba (Qwen)

26.2

Rank #331 Reported

Summary

  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where DeepSeek-V3.1 leads 43.0 to 19.6.

Side by side

DeepSeek-V3.1 and Qwen3-1.7B specifications
DeepSeek-V3.1Qwen3-1.7B
ProviderDeepSeekAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index42.226.2
Released2025-08-212025-04-29
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window164K—
Max output8K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.25—
Output $ / M tokens$0.95—
Results tracked274

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.1: 39.8 (#140), Qwen3-1.7B: —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1Qwen3-1.7B
WeirdML38.4%—
LMArena Coding1417—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.1: —, Qwen3-1.7B: 24.5 (#108)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1Qwen3-1.7B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—28.4%

Reasoning DeepSeek-V3.1 leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 27.3 (#109), Qwen3-1.7B: 18.5 (#263)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1Qwen3-1.7B
SimpleBench40%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark53.2%—
Chess Puzzles—0%
LMArena Hard Prompts1417—
DTBench82.7%—
LMCA24.3%—
Epoch Capabilities Index139.92—
ForecastBench58—

Math DeepSeek-V3.1 leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 36.1 (#125), Qwen3-1.7B: 15.4 (#288)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1Qwen3-1.7B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—8.1%
LMArena Math1420—

Knowledge DeepSeek-V3.1 leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 43.0 (#86), Qwen3-1.7B: 19.6 (#273)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1Qwen3-1.7B
GPQA Diamond—38%
Vectara Hallucination Rate5.5%—
LMArena Expert1403—

Multilingual Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.1: 51.8 (#100), Qwen3-1.7B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1Qwen3-1.7B
LMArena Non-English1400—
LMArena Chinese1470—
LMArena French1447—
LMArena German1412—
LMArena Japanese1374—
LMArena Korean1337—
LMArena Russian1405—
LMArena Spanish1429—

Instruction Following Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.1: 74.1 (#105), Qwen3-1.7B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1Qwen3-1.7B
LMArena Instruction Following1400—

Long Context Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.1: 36.3 (#227), Qwen3-1.7B: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1Qwen3-1.7B
Fiction.LiveBench52.8%—
LMArena Longer Query1422—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.1: 60.5 (#93), Qwen3-1.7B: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1Qwen3-1.7B
LMArena Text1420—
LMArena Creative Writing1401—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1436—
LMArena Multi-Turn1408—

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek-V3.1 better than Qwen3-1.7B?

DeepSeek-V3.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 26.2 on the Noometry Index.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V3.1 and Qwen3-1.7B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V3.1 has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-1.7B has 4.

Related comparisons

Go deeper