When comparing the performance of DeepSeek-R1 and GPT-4o-0513 on the Codeforces benchmark, several key differences emerge:
1. Codeforces Rating: DeepSeek-R1 achieves a Codeforces rating of 2029, which is significantly higher than GPT-4o-0513's rating of 759. This indicates that DeepSeek-R1 performs much better in competitive coding tasks, showcasing stronger algorithmic reasoning and coding capabilities[2][5].
2. Codeforces Percentile: DeepSeek-R1 scores a percentile of 96.3%, reflecting its high standing among human participants. In contrast, GPT-4o-0513 only reaches a percentile of 23.6%, highlighting a substantial gap in their relative performance levels[2][5].
3. Overall Performance: The higher rating and percentile of DeepSeek-R1 suggest that it is more adept at solving complex coding challenges and adapting to the competitive environment of Codeforces. GPT-4o-0513, while capable, does not match DeepSeek-R1's level of proficiency in this domain.
4. Cost and Efficiency: GPT-4o is noted to be roughly 4.6 times more expensive than DeepSeek-R1 for input and output tokens, which could be a significant factor for users prioritizing cost efficiency[3].
In summary, DeepSeek-R1 outperforms GPT-4o-0513 on the Codeforces benchmark by a considerable margin, both in terms of rating and percentile. This makes DeepSeek-R1 a more effective choice for tasks requiring strong coding and algorithmic reasoning skills.
Citations:
[1] https://ithy.com/article/openai-o1-vs-o3-benchmark-analysis-zy5f3bwj
[2] https://blog.getbind.co/2025/01/23/deepseek-r1-vs-gpt-o1-vs-claude-3-5-sonnet-which-is-best-for-coding/
[3] https://docsbot.ai/models/compare/deepseek-r1/gpt-4o
[4] https://www.datacamp.com/blog/deepseek-r1
[5] https://huggingface.co/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-1.5B
[6] https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1hr56e3/notes_on_deepseek_v3_is_it_truly_better_than/
[7] https://codeforces.com/blog/entry/133874
[8] https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1em4nr5/the_new_gpt4o20240806_scores_the_same_as_original/