Model comparison
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has enough public results to be ranked (#23); DeepSeek Coder 1.3B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeek
GoogleSummary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. DeepSeek Coder 1.3B scores higher in 0 categories and Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview in 1 category; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads 42.5 to 31.2.
- DeepSeek Coder 1.3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | |
| Noometry Index | 35.0 | 56.7 |
| Released | 2023-11-02 | 2026-02-19 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 1.05M |
| Max output | — | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $12 |
| Results tracked | 9 | 71 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: 31.2 (#287), Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 42.5 (#99)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 75.6% |
| DeepSWE | — | 11.7% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1447 |
| SciCode | — | 58.9% |
| GSO | — | 22.6% |
| WeirdML | — | 72.1% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 22.8% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1484 |
| MirrorCode | — | 8.9% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 29.6% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,161 |
| AlgoTune | — | 2.02 |
| HumanEval+ | 60.4% | — |
| MBPP+ | 54.8% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.7 (#34)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 80.2% |
| APEX-Agents | — | 35.3% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 26% |
| DeepResearch Bench | — | 47.8% |
| PostTrainBench | — | 22% |
| BALROG | — | 57% |
| ExploitBench | — | 26.1% |
| GBAEval | — | 0.8% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 17% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1211 |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 77% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 3,774 |
Reasoning Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.7 (#12)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 63.6 | 154.77 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 77.1% |
| SimpleBench | — | 79.6% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 97.4% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 98% |
| CritPt | — | 17.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 55% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 36.8% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 79.4% |
| EBR-Bench | — | 14.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1485 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 34% |
| DTBench | — | 97.1% |
| LMCA | — | 53.8% |
| ForecastBench | — | 59 |
| WinoGrande | 53.3% | — |
Math Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 62.1 (#34)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 59.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 26.8% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 86.5% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 95.6% |
| ProofBench | — | 26% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1485 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 36.9% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 16.7% |
| GSM8K | 4.4% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.8 (#3)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 94.4% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 46.4% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 73.5% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 10.4% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1485 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 25.4% | — |
| MMLU | 25.8% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.9 (#69)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1296 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 26.5% |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 26.7% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1444 |
Multilingual Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 57.0 (#12)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1477 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1529 |
| LMArena French | — | 1487 |
| LMArena German | — | 1491 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1493 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1455 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1498 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1479 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 77.0 (#32)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1466 |
Long Context Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 47.4 (#18)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| CL-bench | — | 20.8% |
| CL-bench Life | — | 16.9% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1483 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
DeepSeek Coder 1.3B: —, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 66.1 (#37)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek Coder 1.3B | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1481 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1482 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1491 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1142 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1488 |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek Coder 1.3B better than Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has enough public results to be ranked (#23); DeepSeek Coder 1.3B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Is DeepSeek Coder 1.3B or Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview better for coding?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.5 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek Coder 1.3B and Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. DeepSeek Coder 1.3B has 9 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has 71.