Skip to main content
Kaino.dev
Discover
Evals
News
Academics
Insights
Kaino.dev

Discover, evaluate, and compare AI tools, models, and agents.

Explore

  • Discover
  • Evaluations
  • News
  • Academics
  • Insights

Community

  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Instagram
Privacy PolicyTerms of Service

© 2026 Kaino.dev. All rights reserved.

Version 1.1.0
deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-R1 · Evaluations · Kaino
deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-R1 logo
model evaluation

deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-R1

deepseek-ai

DeepSeek-R1 is an open-source DeepSeek text-generation model with an official GitHub repository and availability through DeepSeek website and API access.

modellead-sourcehugging-face-popular-modelssource:github.comtext-generationopen-sourceMITDeepSeek-R1DeepSeekHugging FaceGitHub
72.2KAINO SCORERecommended
Evaluated Aug 6, 202611 reviews
Website Docs GitHub

Scorecard

PricingMultimodalCostDev expTechnicalSpeedCodingReasoningRiskAdoption
  • Cost effectiveness83
  • Adoption signal79
  • Developer experience78
  • Technical capability78
  • Speed & availability76
  • Risk & evidence74
  • Reasoning & knowledge72
  • Pricing clarity65
  • Coding & agentic62
  • Multimodal & I/O55

Kainotomic evaluation

DeepSeek-R1 remains a capable text reasoning model, but its public evidence places it below newer frontier anchors such as Claude Opus 4.8 and GPT-5.5 on broad capability, coding, and reasoning. Its 671B MoE architecture (37B active) and reported SWE-bench Verified result of 49.2% support solid technical and software capability. The current Arena-Hard-v2 preview result—58.0%, ninth place—supports a good but no longer leading reasoning score. It is text-focused, so it trails multimodal models such as Gemini 3.5 Flash. Value is the strongest practical dimension. Artificial Analysis reports median provider pricing of $1.675/M input and $4.70/M output tokens, materially better than premium proprietary frontier models, while tracked providers can deliver 178.8 output tokens/s and 14.24s TTFT. MIT licensing, weights, local-running material, API access, and broad third-party serving improve flexibility and developer access. These advantages place it above DeepSeek-V3.2’s published developer-experience anchor, though deployment of the full model is operationally demanding. Coding evidence is mixed: the official 49.2% SWE-bench Verified claim is meaningful, but Terminus 1 using R1 recorded only 5.7% ±1.4 on Terminal-Bench 1.0, and no DeepSWE result is listed. LiveCodeBench was checked but the supplied evidence contains no score. Vendor-reported historical ArenaHard 92.3 is not directly comparable with the current style-controlled Arena-Hard result. Official pricing detail is incomplete, so cost and pricing scores rely partly on Artificial Analysis provider observations.

Strengths

  • MIT-licensed open weights with official local-running guidance and API access.
  • Competitive observed provider pricing and strong tracked third-party throughput.
  • Documented SWE-bench Verified result and substantial public recognition.

Caveats

  • Text-centric offering with no supplied evidence of native image, audio, or video I/O.
  • Current Arena-Hard-v2 result is good but below current leading models.
  • Full-weight self-hosting has substantial infrastructure requirements.