Model comparison

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp vs Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.9 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index. Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct costs 1.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 28 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp DeepSeek

44.9

Rank #68 Confirmed

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct Meta

30.3

Rank #283 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 28 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp scores higher in 9 categories and Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads 40.8 to 14.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 87.8% for DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp and 5.1% for Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct.
  • Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.32 per million input/output tokens, against $0.26 / $0.38 for DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp.
  • DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp accepts more context: 164K tokens versus 128K.

Side by side

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp and Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct specifications
DeepSeek-V3.2-ExpLlama-3.3-70B-Instruct
ProviderDeepSeekMeta
Noometry Index44.930.3
Released2025-09-292024-12-06
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window164K128K
Max output66K4K
Input $ / M tokens$0.26$0.10
Output $ / M tokens$0.38$0.32
Results tracked4843

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

Category by category

Coding DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 46.4 (#61), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 30.6 (#284)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpLlama-3.3-70B-Instruct
SciCode38.9%26%
WeirdML39.5%14.4%
LMArena Coding14541268
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)70%—
Aider Polyglot74.2%—
LMArena WebDev1362—
SWE-bench Multilingual59%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—46.9%
LiveBench Coding—36.6%
BigCodeBench Complete—57.5%

Agentic & Tool Use DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 37.9 (#31), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 25.6 (#100)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpLlama-3.3-70B-Instruct
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard56.7%31.9%
Terminal-Bench39.6%—
TheAgentCompany42.9%—
BALROG—23%
Vending-Bench 21,034—

Reasoning DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 22.0 (#185), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 13.7 (#325)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpLlama-3.3-70B-Instruct
CritPt2.9%0%
LMArena Hard Prompts14331257
DTBench87.7%59.5%
LMCA29.1%17.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index146.28127.32
ARC-AGI-24%—
SimpleBench—19.9%
Kagi LLM Benchmark52.2%—
NYT Connections (extended)36.7%—
ARC-AGI-157%—
Chess Puzzles14%—
Thematic Generalization65%—
LiveBench Reasoning—50.8%
LiveBench Data Analysis—49.5%
ForecastBench—58.6
LiveBench—50.2%

Math DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 40.8 (#75), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 14.3 (#292)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpLlama-3.3-70B-Instruct
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202587.8%5.1%
LMArena Math14351268
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions57.7%—
ProofBench8%—
LiveBench Math—42.2%
MATH Level 5—41.6%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)22.1%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)2.1%—

Knowledge DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 51.6 (#61), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 30.5 (#220)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpLlama-3.3-70B-Instruct
GPQA Diamond83.4%47.4%
Vectara Hallucination Rate5.3%4.1%
LMArena Expert14361225
Confabulations—22.8%
MMLU—86.3%

Multilingual DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 52.4 (#85), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 40.1 (#215)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpLlama-3.3-70B-Instruct
LMArena Non-English14091236
LMArena Chinese14611217
LMArena French14351280
LMArena German14401251
LMArena Japanese13771149
LMArena Korean13721142
LMArena Russian14231252
LMArena Spanish14411269

Instruction Following DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 74.7 (#89), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 71.3 (#152)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpLlama-3.3-70B-Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following14131242
LiveBench Instruction Following—82.7%

Long Context DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 47.6 (#15), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 26.4 (#290)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpLlama-3.3-70B-Instruct
Fiction.LiveBench83.3%33.3%
LMArena Longer Query14281256
CL-bench13.2%—
CL-bench Life9.5%—

Writing & Preference DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 62.5 (#73), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 47.8 (#203)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpLlama-3.3-70B-Instruct
LMArena Text14251274
LMArena Creative Writing14031250
LMArena Multi-Turn14271279
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1515—
LiveBench Language—39.2%

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp better than Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct?

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.9 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index. Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct costs 1.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp or Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct?

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.32 per million output tokens; DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp lists at $0.26 and $0.38.

Is DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp or Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct better for coding?

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.4 versus 30.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp does, with 164K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp and Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct share?

28 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp has 48 scored results on Noometry and Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct has 43.

Related comparisons

Go deeper