Model comparison

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus vs phi-3-medium 14B

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.6 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus DeepSeek

42.6

Rank #96 Confirmed

phi-3-medium 14B Microsoft

29.1

Rank #306 Reported

Summary

  • The widest gap is in math, where DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus leads 35.7 to 25.2.

Side by side

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus and phi-3-medium 14B specifications
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminusphi-3-medium 14B
ProviderDeepSeekMicrosoft
Noometry Index42.629.1
Released2025-09-222024-04-23
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window164K—
Max output66K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.30—
Output $ / M tokens$1—
Results tracked1613

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

Category by category

Coding DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus leads

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 41.5 (#114), phi-3-medium 14B: 36.3 (#198)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1-Terminusphi-3-medium 14B
SciCode40.6%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—37.6%
LMArena Coding1426—
BigCodeBench Complete—48.7%
ALE-Bench745.17—

Reasoning Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 25.7 (#126), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1-Terminusphi-3-medium 14B
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.4%—
CritPt1.7%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1427—
DTBench81.3%—
LMCA28.6%—
Adversarial NLI—55.8%
BIG-Bench Hard—81.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index—121.18
HellaSwag—82.4%
WinoGrande—81.5%

Math DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus leads

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 35.7 (#138), phi-3-medium 14B: 25.2 (#249)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1-Terminusphi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Math1402—
MATH Level 5—17.6%

Knowledge Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: —, phi-3-medium 14B: 9.1 (#301)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1-Terminusphi-3-medium 14B
GPQA Diamond—27.6%
ARC (AI2) Challenge—91.6%
MMLU—78%
OpenBookQA—87.4%
TriviaQA—73.9%

Multilingual Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 52.3 (#87), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1-Terminusphi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Non-English1407—
LMArena Russian1434—

Instruction Following Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 74.4 (#96), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1-Terminusphi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Instruction Following1406—

Long Context Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 43.5 (#88), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1-Terminusphi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Longer Query1426—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 61.3 (#87), phi-3-medium 14B: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1-Terminusphi-3-medium 14B
LMArena Text1420—
LMArena Creative Writing1404—
LMArena Multi-Turn1411—

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus better than phi-3-medium 14B?

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.6 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus or phi-3-medium 14B better for coding?

DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.5 versus 36.3 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus and phi-3-medium 14B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus has 16 scored results on Noometry and phi-3-medium 14B has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper