Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5.5 vs DeepSeek Coder 1.3B

Claude Opus 5.5 has enough public results to be ranked (#3); DeepSeek Coder 1.3B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic

68.5

Rank #3 Confirmed

DeepSeek Coder 1.3B DeepSeek

34.5

Unranked Sparse

Summary

  • The widest gap is in coding, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 71.4 to 30.7.
  • DeepSeek Coder 1.3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5.5DeepSeek Coder 1.3B
ProviderAnthropicDeepSeek
Noometry Index68.534.5
Released2026-09-222023-11-02
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$4—
Output $ / M tokens$20—
Results tracked359

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 71.4 (#1), DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: 30.7 (#282)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5DeepSeek Coder 1.3B
FrontierCode54.4%—
CursorBench57.8%—
LMArena WebDev1820—
FrontierSWE62.3%—
SciCode66.9%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—22.8%
LMArena Coding1545—
MirrorCode77.4%—
BigCodeBench Complete—29.6%
HumanEval+—60.4%
MBPP+—54.8%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#13), DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5DeepSeek Coder 1.3B
APEX-Agents73.5%—
GDP.pdf30.6%—

Reasoning Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 79.5 (#2), DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5DeepSeek Coder 1.3B
ARC-AGI-292.5%—
NYT Connections (extended)88.5%—
ARC-AGI-197.5%—
CritPt31.7%—
EBR-Bench71.4%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1545—
Mystery Game Puzzles71%—
DTBench98.9%—
LMCA68.2%—
Epoch Capabilities Index—62.18
WinoGrande—53.3%

Math Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 92.4 (#2), DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5DeepSeek Coder 1.3B
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)91.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 495%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench100%—
GSM8K—4.4%

Knowledge Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 66.6 (#9), DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5DeepSeek Coder 1.3B
GPQA Diamond90.6%—
SimpleQA Verified72.2%—
LMArena Expert1564—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—25.4%
MMLU—25.8%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 56.5 (#2), DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5DeepSeek Coder 1.3B
Furniture Assembly83.3%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 59.8 (#1), DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5DeepSeek Coder 1.3B
LMArena Non-English1513—
LMArena Chinese1572—
LMArena Russian1532—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.1 (#2), DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5DeepSeek Coder 1.3B
LMArena Instruction Following1535—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 47.3 (#18), DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5DeepSeek Coder 1.3B
LMArena Longer Query1540—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 78.7 (#3), DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5DeepSeek Coder 1.3B
LMArena Text1518—
LMArena Creative Writing1538—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2050—
LMArena Multi-Turn1520—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than DeepSeek Coder 1.3B?

Claude Opus 5.5 has enough public results to be ranked (#3); DeepSeek Coder 1.3B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Is Claude Opus 5.5 or DeepSeek Coder 1.3B better for coding?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.4 versus 30.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5.5 and DeepSeek Coder 1.3B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 35 scored results on Noometry and DeepSeek Coder 1.3B has 9.

Related comparisons

Go deeper