DeepSeek R1 0528 vs Llama 3.3 70B
Side-by-side benchmark comparison across coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing.
DeepSeek R1 0528 by DeepSeek wins on 9 of 14 benchmarks against Llama 3.3 70B by Meta, which leads on 4. This head-to-head comparison covers coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing metrics from the AI Value Index.
Category-by-Category Breakdown
General Intelligence: In general intelligence, DeepSeek R1 0528 scores 1375 on Chatbot Arena ELO compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 1210, while DeepSeek R1 0528 scores 84.0% on MMLU-Pro compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 60.0%.
Coding: In coding, DeepSeek R1 0528 scores 88.0% on HumanEval+ compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 72.0%, while DeepSeek R1 0528 scores 55.0% on SWE-bench Verified compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 22.0%, while DeepSeek R1 0528 scores 58.0% on LiveCodeBench compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 26.0%.
Math: In math, DeepSeek R1 0528 scores 96.0% on MATH compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 60.0%, while DeepSeek R1 0528 scores 97.5% on GSM8K compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 82.0%.
Reasoning: In reasoning, DeepSeek R1 0528 scores 81.0% on GPQA Diamond compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 34.0%, while DeepSeek R1 0528 scores 15.0% on ARC-AGI compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 10.0%.
Context: In context, both score 131K on Context Length.
Pricing Comparison
DeepSeek R1 0528 costs $0.55/1M input tokens and $2.2/1M output tokens, while Llama 3.3 70B costs $0.10/1M input and $0.30/1M output. Llama 3.3 70B is the more affordable option for API usage.
Speed Comparison
DeepSeek R1 0528 generates output at 40 tok/s compared to Llama 3.3 70B's 90 tok/s, and the time to first token is 900 ms for DeepSeek R1 0528 versus 300 ms for Llama 3.3 70B. Llama 3.3 70B delivers faster throughput.
Verdict
For developers prioritizing coding and general intelligence and math, DeepSeek R1 0528 has the edge. For those who value affordability and speed, Llama 3.3 70B is the stronger choice.
View Individual Model Pages
DeepSeek R1 0528 vs Llama 3.3 70B — FAQ
Which is better, DeepSeek R1 0528 or Llama 3.3 70B?
DeepSeek R1 0528 wins on more benchmarks overall (9 vs 4). However, the best choice depends on your specific needs — each model excels in different areas.
How does DeepSeek R1 0528 compare to Llama 3.3 70B for coding?
DeepSeek R1 0528 is better for coding, scoring 55.0% on SWE-bench Verified compared to 22.0%. SWE-bench tests real-world software engineering by resolving actual GitHub issues.
Is DeepSeek R1 0528 cheaper than Llama 3.3 70B?
Yes, Llama 3.3 70B is cheaper. DeepSeek R1 0528 costs $0.55/1M input and $2.2/1M output tokens. Llama 3.3 70B costs $0.10/1M input and $0.30/1M output tokens.
Which is faster, DeepSeek R1 0528 or Llama 3.3 70B?
Llama 3.3 70B is faster, generating output at 90 tok/s compared to 40 tok/s. Faster output speed means shorter wait times for API responses.
What benchmarks does the DeepSeek R1 0528 vs Llama 3.3 70B comparison cover?
This comparison covers 14 benchmarks including Chatbot Arena ELO, MMLU-Pro, HumanEval+, MATH, SWE-bench Verified, GPQA Diamond, Output Speed, Time to First Token, and more. Metrics span general intelligence, coding, math, reasoning, speed, and cost categories.