Model comparison

DeepSeek-V3.1 vs Step 2 16k Exp 202412

DeepSeek-V3.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.8 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek-V3.1 DeepSeek

42.8

Rank #108 Confirmed

Step 2 16k Exp 202412 StepFun

39.2

Rank #171 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek-V3.1 scores higher in 7 categories and Step 2 16k Exp 202412 in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where DeepSeek-V3.1 leads 43.7 to 35.2.
  • DeepSeek-V3.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

DeepSeek-V3.1 and Step 2 16k Exp 202412 specifications
DeepSeek-V3.1Step 2 16k Exp 202412
ProviderDeepSeekStepFun
Noometry Index42.839.2
Released2025-08-21—
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window164K—
Max output8K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.25—
Output $ / M tokens$0.95—
Results tracked2712

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

Category by category

Coding DeepSeek-V3.1 leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 40.3 (#144), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 38.5 (#174)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1Step 2 16k Exp 202412
LMArena Coding14171316
WeirdML38.4%—

Reasoning DeepSeek-V3.1 leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 27.9 (#110), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 25.9 (#142)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1Step 2 16k Exp 202412
LMArena Hard Prompts14171299
SimpleBench40%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark53.2%—
DTBench82.7%—
LMCA24.3%—
Epoch Capabilities Index139.92—
ForecastBench58—

Math DeepSeek-V3.1 leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 38.9 (#122), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 36.3 (#169)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1Step 2 16k Exp 202412
LMArena Math14201304

Knowledge DeepSeek-V3.1 leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 43.7 (#90), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 35.2 (#187)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1Step 2 16k Exp 202412
LMArena Expert14051279
Vectara Hallucination Rate5.5%—

Multilingual DeepSeek-V3.1 leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 51.6 (#106), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 43.7 (#181)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1Step 2 16k Exp 202412
LMArena Non-English14001290
LMArena Chinese14691331
LMArena Russian14051324
LMArena French1447—
LMArena German1411—
LMArena Japanese1378—
LMArena Korean1337—
LMArena Spanish1431—

Instruction Following DeepSeek-V3.1 leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 73.9 (#110), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 67.9 (#192)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1Step 2 16k Exp 202412
LMArena Instruction Following14001287

Long Context Step 2 16k Exp 202412 leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 36.3 (#232), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 39.7 (#170)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1Step 2 16k Exp 202412
LMArena Longer Query14221307
Fiction.LiveBench52.8%—

Writing & Preference DeepSeek-V3.1 leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 60.3 (#98), Step 2 16k Exp 202412: 52.3 (#173)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1Step 2 16k Exp 202412
LMArena Text14201321
LMArena Creative Writing14011328
LMArena Multi-Turn14081292
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1436—

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek-V3.1 better than Step 2 16k Exp 202412?

DeepSeek-V3.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.8 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is DeepSeek-V3.1 or Step 2 16k Exp 202412 better for coding?

DeepSeek-V3.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.3 versus 38.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V3.1 and Step 2 16k Exp 202412 share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V3.1 has 27 scored results on Noometry and Step 2 16k Exp 202412 has 12.

Related comparisons

Go deeper