Compare / DeepSeek V3.1 vs Llama 3.2 1B Instruct

DeepSeek V3.1 vs Llama 3.2 1B Instruct

Which is cheaper, which is more capable, and which does better at each kind of work, from 16 results on 3 sources that measured both models.

DeepSeek V3.1
DeepSeek · profile
Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
Meta · profile
Results compared
16
Shared sources
3

DeepSeek V3.1 or Llama 3.2 1B Instruct? The short answer

  • Llama 3.2 1B Instruct is cheaper: $0.071 against $0.82 per million tokens, 12 times less.
  • DeepSeek V3.1 scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index: 13.7 against 4.8.
  • On our business benchmarks, DeepSeek V3.1 ranks higher for reasoning and knowledge and writing.

At a glance

DeepSeek V3.1Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
Price per million tokens$0.55 in · $1.65 out$0.027 in · $0.20 out
Blended (3 in : 1 out)$0.82$0.071
Cheapest host, blended$0.42 (DeepInfra, FP4)–
Intelligence Index13.74.8
Spring Prompt overall––
Output speed, tokens a second––
Context window163,840 tokens60,000 tokens
WeightsOpenOpen
Developer based inChinathe US

Prices are the developer's list price where we have read it, otherwise the typical host on OpenRouter; see every model's price. Intelligence and speed from Artificial Analysis.

Which is better for what

Each model's rank among models available today, for each kind of work, from our own benchmarks and licensed sources. The better rank is in green.

Use caseDeepSeek V3.1Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
Agents and tool useMulti-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls not measured 161 of 161
Reasoning and knowledgeHard questions across science, maths and general knowledge 114 of 195 189 of 195
WritingWhat people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality 82 of 187 186 of 187
Sticking to the factsSummarising without inventing things, and factual answers 20 of 153 not measured

Every shared result

BenchmarkMetricDeepSeek V3.1Llama 3.2 1B Instruct
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedBusiness, management and financeArena rating 1,4171,070
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedCreative writingArena rating 1,4021,083
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedExpert promptsArena rating 1,4321,082
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedInstruction followingArena rating 1,4161,086
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedOverallArena rating 1,4171,111
Arena (formerly LMArena)reportedWriting, literature and languageArena rating 1,4071,076
Artificial AnalysisreportedArtificial Analysis Intelligence Indexindex score 13.74.80
Artificial AnalysisreportedGPQA Diamond% of questions 77.9%19.6%
Artificial AnalysisreportedHumanity's Last Exam% of questions 14.3%5.5%
Artificial AnalysisreportedIFBench% of instructions 41.5%22.8%
Artificial AnalysisreportedLong-context reasoning (AA-LCR)% of questions 56.7%6.7%
Artificial AnalysisreportedTerminal-Bench Hard% of tasks 25.0%0.0%
Artificial AnalysisreportedΤ²-bench telecom% of tasks 37.4%0.0%
UGI LeaderboardreportedRequested-length error% off the requested word count 30.0%22.0%
UGI LeaderboardreportedStyle adherencescore from 0 to 1 0.360.33
UGI LeaderboardreportedWriting scorescore out of 100 51.911.8

Bold green marks the better value on that metric. Where a source reports ranges that overlap, the difference may not be meaningful; see the benchmark page for ranges.

Quick answers

Is DeepSeek V3.1 better than Llama 3.2 1B Instruct?

It depends on the task. Among models available today, on our benchmarks and licensed sources, DeepSeek V3.1 ranks higher for reasoning and knowledge and writing.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V3.1 or Llama 3.2 1B Instruct?

Llama 3.2 1B Instruct costs $0.071 per million tokens (three input to one output), against $0.82 for DeepSeek V3.1.

Run DeepSeek V3.1 and Llama 3.2 1B Instruct on your own prompt

Benchmarks aren't your data. Try both side by side in the playground, with the cost of every answer.