DeepSeek V3.1 — Benchmarks
Benchmark scores for DeepSeek V3.1 aggregated from public leaderboards (8 boards), with how it ranks among open models and how it compares with its nearest neighbours. See hardware requirements for what you need to run it.
- #56 of 106 open models
- 8 boards · updated Nov 2026
- 100 = average open model
- Hardware requirements →
DeepSeek V3.1 reasoning benchmarks
Multi-step logic and problem-solving — can the model think through a hard problem rather than recall an answer.
40.0%
40.0%
median 40.8%open leader 61.1%
Overall best: Claude Fable 5 Max 81.9%
46th percentile · #14 of 25 open · #72 of 101 all
IndependentEpoch AI ·
82.7%
82.7%
median 68.7%open leader 93.9%
Overall best: Claude Opus 5.5 Max 98.9%
73rd percentile · #19 of 70 open · #120 of 235 all
Lab-reportedEpoch AI ·
52.8%
52.8%
median 61.1%open leader 86.1%
Overall best: GPT 5 (Aug 07, 2025, medium) 97.2%
33rd percentile · #17 of 25 open · #40 of 58 all
IndependentEpoch AI ·
60.7
60.7
median 61.5open leader 64.7
Overall best: GPT 5.5 (high) 67.0
33rd percentile · #16 of 24 open · #75 of 92 all
Lab-reportedEpoch AI ·
24.3%
24.3%
median 25.5%open leader 55.5%
Overall best: Claude Sonnet 5.5 Max 68.3%
45th percentile · #31 of 56 open · #154 of 197 all
Lab-reportedEpoch AI ·
DeepSeek V3.1 coding benchmarks
Writing, editing, and fixing real code — measured by whether the resulting program actually runs and passes tests.
DeepSeek V3.1 knowledge benchmarks
Breadth and depth of factual knowledge across many subjects, paired with the reasoning to apply it.
DeepSeek V3.1 instruction following benchmarks
How precisely a model obeys explicit, verifiable instructions — format, length, and content constraints — and, more broadly, how much people prefer its responses head-to-head in blind human voting.
1416.9
1416.9
median 1321.4open leader 1488.2
Overall best: Gemini 4 Carbon (High) 1527.5
81st percentile · #37 of 188 open · #133 of 408 all
ArenaArena ·
Score vs VRAM in the ≤512 GB tier
- DeepSeek V3.1
- Other models
- Best Score for its VRAM
#52 of 102 that fit ≤512 GB
Each dot is a model at the best quant that fits ≤512 GB. The line steps up to the best Score available at each amount of VRAM; a dot below it is beaten by a model that needs no more memory.
Full ≤512 GB ranking →DeepSeek V3.1 vs its neighbours
Same boards for the nearest open models per llmrun Score. The highest score in each row is marked.
| Board | DeepSeek V3.1this model | Qwen3.8 27Bbest in classQ4_K_M · 18 GB | GLM 4.5nearest by ScoreQ4_K_M · 218 GB | Kimi K2 Instructnearest by ScoreQ4_K_M · 617 GB | DeepSeek R1nearest by ScoreQ4_K_M · 412 GB |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| llmrun Score | 100.2 | 122.0 | 100.9 | 100.1 | 98.9 |
| SimpleBench | 40.0% | — | — | 26.3% | 30.9% |
| DTBench | 82.7% | 88.0% | — | — | — |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 52.8% | — | 58.3% | 61.1% | 69.4% |
| ForecastBench | 60.7 | — | — | 62.2 | — |
| LMCA | 24.3% | 41.4% | — | — | — |
| WeirdML | 38.4% | — | 40.6% | 39.4% | 36.5% |
| MMLU-Pro | 84.8% | — | 84.6% | 81.0% | 84.0% |
| LMArena Text | 1416.9 | 1435.6 | 1410.9 | 1417.8 | 1398.1 |
| Compare head to head | Compare | Compare | Compare | Compare |
Scores aggregated from public benchmark sources (Epoch AI: 6 boards, Arena: 1 board, TIGER-Lab: 1 board) — each linked from the benchmark pages. llmrun does not run these benchmarks. Percentiles and ranks are among open models in the llmrun catalogue; the median and leader marks refer to the same field.