# DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus vs phi-3-medium 14B

> DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.6 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/deepseek-v3-1-terminus-vs-phi-3-medium-14b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in math, where DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus leads 35.7 to 25.2.

## Snapshot

| | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Microsoft |
| Noometry Index | 42.6 | 29.1 |
| Rank | 96 | 306 |
| Context | 164K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.30 | — |
| Output $/M | $1 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 41.5 (#114)
- phi-3-medium 14B: 36.3 (#198)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 40.6% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 37.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1426 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 48.7% |
| ALE-Bench | 745.17 | — |

## Reasoning

- DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 25.7 (#126)
- phi-3-medium 14B: —

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 57.4% | — |
| CritPt | 1.7% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1427 | — |
| DTBench | 81.3% | — |
| LMCA | 28.6% | — |
| Adversarial NLI | — | 55.8% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 81.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 121.18 |
| HellaSwag | — | 82.4% |
| WinoGrande | — | 81.5% |

## Math

- DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 35.7 (#138)
- phi-3-medium 14B: 25.2 (#249)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1402 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 17.6% |

## Knowledge

- DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: —
- phi-3-medium 14B: 9.1 (#301)

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 27.6% |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 91.6% |
| MMLU | — | 78% |
| OpenBookQA | — | 87.4% |
| TriviaQA | — | 73.9% |

## Multilingual

- DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 52.3 (#87)
- phi-3-medium 14B: —

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1407 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1434 | — |

## Instruction Following

- DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 74.4 (#96)
- phi-3-medium 14B: —

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1406 | — |

## Long Context

- DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 43.5 (#88)
- phi-3-medium 14B: —

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1426 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 61.3 (#87)
- phi-3-medium 14B: —

| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | phi-3-medium 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1420 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1404 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1411 | — |

## FAQ

### Is DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus better than phi-3-medium 14B?

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.6 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

### Is DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus or phi-3-medium 14B better for coding?

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.5 versus 36.3 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus and phi-3-medium 14B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus has 16 scored results on Noometry and phi-3-medium 14B has 13.