Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 17, 2026

DeepSeek R1 vs Llama 4 Maverick benchmark

Name: DeepSeek R1 vs Llama 4 Maverick AI benchmark comparison
Creator: CompareLLM
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This page compares DeepSeek R1 (DeepSeek) and Llama 4 Maverick (Meta) using the latest snapshots we have as of Aug 17, 2026. On preference Elo, Llama 4 Maverick is ahead by 110 points (1,468 vs 1,358; lmarena (Aug 17, 2026)). On SWE-bench coding, DeepSeek R1 resolves 65.2% versus 57.1% (swebench (Aug 17, 2026)). Llama 4 Maverick streams faster (130 tok/s) while Llama 4 Maverick is the cheaper output token ($0.8/1M). Llama 4 Maverick has the larger context window (1M tokens). Every cell below is a dated snapshot from a named public source — we do not invent missing scores, and we do not run SWE-bench ourselves.

Share Analysis:

WhatsApp Telegram X / Post LinkedIn Reddit

DeepSeek

DeepSeek R1

Open-weights reasoning model trained with large-scale RL.

Elo 1,358$2.5/1M out

DeepSeek R1 Reasoning Scaler & Token Billing Simulator

Param: enable_reasoning

Reasoning models scale test-time compute by generating hidden chain-of-thought (CoT) tokens. These tokens are billed at standard output rates and directly expand latency (TTFT) in exchange for higher GPQA Diamond and SWE-bench Verified problem resolve rates.

Estimated TTFT

420 ms

1.0x (Standard eval)

CoT Thinking Tokens

~2,800

Billed as output tokens

Est. Cost / 1k Calls

$8.10

7.4x base invoice

STEM / SWE Boost

+6.5%

GPQA & SWE-bench scaling

Medium (Full RL CoT) Operational Profile

Standard large-scale RL reasoning trace with self-correction.

Direct Provider APIDeepSeek

"enable_reasoning": true

OpenRouter Unified APIUnified Gateway

"reasoning": {
  "effort": "medium",
  "max_tokens": 2800
}

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Instant pairwise benchmark recalculation across 400+ LLMs

Model A

Model B

Quick vs:vs Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

DeepSeek R1 (2)vsLlama 4 Maverick (8)

DeepSeek R1: 2W (20%)Overall: Llama 4 MaverickLlama 4 Maverick: 8W (80%)

← DeepSeek R1Llama 4 Maverick →

Llama 4 Maverick (3/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,358vs1,468

Coding Elo

—vs1,452

SWE-bench

65.2%vs57.1%

LiveBench

59%vs62.8%

GPQA Diamond

79.8%vs74.6%

DeepSeek R1: 2WLlama 4 Maverick: 3W

Llama 4 Maverick (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

62 tok/svs130 tok/s

Time to first token

420 msvs170 ms

DeepSeek R1: 0WLlama 4 Maverick: 2W

Llama 4 Maverick (3/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$2.5/1Mvs$0.8/1M

Input price

$0.7/1Mvs$0.2/1M

Context window

64kvs1M

DeepSeek R1: 0WLlama 4 Maverick: 3W

Capability Matchup Radar

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Each spoke is a skill. Farther from the center is better (0–100th percentile). Tap any dot to inspect details.

Tap any node to inspect

Percentile 0–100

Dimensional AdvantageLlama 4 Maverick 4/6

Preference Elo

Llama 4 Maverick

110 pts advantage

Throughput Speed

Llama 4 Maverick

68 tok/s faster

Token Price Efficiency

Llama 4 Maverick

$1.70/1M cheaper

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

—

Elo

High is better

1,358

EloHigh is better

1,468+8%

Code Elo

High is better

—

Code EloHigh is better

1,452

LiveBench

High is better

59%

LiveBenchHigh is better

62.8%+6%

SWE-bench

High is better

+14%65.2%

SWE-benchHigh is better

57.1%

GPQA

High is better

+7%79.8%

GPQAHigh is better

74.6%

TTFT

Low is better

420 ms

TTFTLow is better

170 ms+147%

Speed

High is better

62 tok/s

SpeedHigh is better

130 tok/s+110%

In $

Low is better

$0.70 / 1M

In $Low is better

$0.20 / 1M+250%

Out $

Low is better

$2.50 / 1M

Out $Low is better

$0.80 / 1M+213%

Context

High is better

64k

ContextHigh is better

1M+1538%

Interactive Simulator (USD)

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Simulate monthly production API costs in USD (US Dollar).

Save up to 69% with Llama 4 Maverick

Monthly Volume50M tokens/mo

Quick Presets:

Token Ratio (In vs Out)70% In / 30% Out

RAG / Search (10% out)Coding / Chat (50% out)

DeepSeek R1$62.00 / mo

In: $24.5Out: $37.5

Llama 4 Maverick$19.00 / mo

In: $7Out: $12

Estimated Cost Delta

Llama 4 Maverick is estimated to save $43.00/month ($516/year).

Based on 50M tokens (30% gen)

Key Selection Recommendations

1
DeepSeek R1:Pick DeepSeek R1 when repo-level coding accuracy is the constraint.
2
Llama 4 Maverick:Pick Llama 4 Maverick when you are optimizing output cost.
3
Llama 4 Maverick:Pick Llama 4 Maverick when time-to-first-token matters more than peak Elo.

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsDeepSeek R1

Higher SWE-bench (65.2%).

High-volume chatLlama 4 Maverick

Lower output list price ($0.8/1M).

Voice / low-latency UILlama 4 Maverick

Lower TTFT (170 ms).

Long-document RAGLlama 4 Maverick

Larger window (1M).

Screenshots / visionLlama 4 Maverick

Llama 4 Maverick is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	DeepSeek R1	Higher SWE-bench (65.2%).
High-volume chat	Llama 4 Maverick	Lower output list price ($0.8/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	Llama 4 Maverick	Lower TTFT (170 ms).
Long-document RAG	Llama 4 Maverick	Larger window (1M).
Screenshots / vision	Llama 4 Maverick	Llama 4 Maverick is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

View all news

compareApr 9, 2026

Llama vs Claude: open-weight Meta versus the Anthropic crown

Hub remaps to top Meta vs top Anthropic Elo. Usually Maverick vs Opus 5.

launchApr 8, 2026

Llama 4 Maverick: Meta’s natively multimodal open-weight flagship

Apr 2026. The Llama vs Claude hub uses the top Meta Elo row — usually Maverick.

launchJan 20, 2025

DeepSeek R1 stays as the open-weights RL baseline

Jan 2025 reasoning model. Still searched. V4 Pro is the newer DeepSeek buy.

launchDec 6, 2024

Llama 3.3 70B stays as the previous Meta 70B workhorse

Dec 2024 instruct 70B. Still a self-host baseline. Llama 4 is the 2026 buy.

Community Sentiment

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!

Share card

The real PNG is generated at /compare/deepseek-r1-vs-llama-4-maverick/opengraph-image for crawlers.

PNG

CompareLLM Matrix

Verified head-to-head card

LIVE

DeepSeek

DeepSeek R1

Elo 1,358

LiveBench59%

SWE-bench65.2%

Speed62 tok/s

Output cost$2.5/1M

Llama 4 Maverick

Elo 1,468

LiveBench62.8%

SWE-bench57.1%

Speed130 tok/s

Output cost$0.8/1M

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, DeepSeek R1 or Llama 4 Maverick?: Llama 4 Maverick has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,468). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.
Which is better at coding, DeepSeek R1 or Llama 4 Maverick?: DeepSeek R1 leads SWE-bench at 65.2% vs 57.1%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.
Which is cheaper to run in production?: Llama 4 Maverick output tokens are $0.8/1M versus $2.5/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.
Which is faster, DeepSeek R1 or Llama 4 Maverick?: Llama 4 Maverick has the lower time-to-first-token (170 ms vs 420 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.
Which has the larger context window?: Llama 4 Maverick accepts 1M tokens versus 64k.
Can I self-host either model?: Both DeepSeek R1 and Llama 4 Maverick are marked open-weights. Hosting cost is not in this table.
Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?: No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.
What does preference Elo mean on this page?: Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. DeepSeek R1 and Llama 4 Maverick Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All DeepSeek R1 matchups →|All Llama 4 Maverick matchups →

DeepSeek R1 vs DeepSeek V3 (previous deepseek)DeepSeek R1 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro (next deepseek)Llama 4 Maverick vs Llama 3.3 70B (previous llama)Llama 4 Maverick vs Llama 4 Scout (next llama)DeepSeek V4 Flash vs Llama 4 Maverick DeepSeek V4 Pro vs Llama 4 Maverick

DeepSeek R1 vs Llama 4 Maverick benchmark

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

DeepSeek R1 (2)vsLlama 4 Maverick (8)

DeepSeek R1: 2W (20%)Overall: Llama 4 MaverickLlama 4 Maverick: 8W (80%)

← DeepSeek R1Llama 4 Maverick →

Llama 4 Maverick (3/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,358vs1,468

Coding Elo

—vs1,452

SWE-bench

65.2%vs57.1%

LiveBench

59%vs62.8%

GPQA Diamond

79.8%vs74.6%

DeepSeek R1: 2WLlama 4 Maverick: 3W

Llama 4 Maverick (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

62 tok/svs130 tok/s

Time to first token

420 msvs170 ms

DeepSeek R1: 0WLlama 4 Maverick: 2W

Llama 4 Maverick (3/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$2.5/1Mvs$0.8/1M

Input price

$0.7/1Mvs$0.2/1M

Context window

64kvs1M

DeepSeek R1: 0WLlama 4 Maverick: 3W

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsDeepSeek R1

Higher SWE-bench (65.2%).

High-volume chatLlama 4 Maverick

Lower output list price ($0.8/1M).

Voice / low-latency UILlama 4 Maverick

Lower TTFT (170 ms).

Long-document RAGLlama 4 Maverick

Larger window (1M).

Screenshots / visionLlama 4 Maverick

Llama 4 Maverick is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	DeepSeek R1	Higher SWE-bench (65.2%).
High-volume chat	Llama 4 Maverick	Lower output list price ($0.8/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	Llama 4 Maverick	Lower TTFT (170 ms).
Long-document RAG	Llama 4 Maverick	Larger window (1M).
Screenshots / vision	Llama 4 Maverick	Llama 4 Maverick is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, DeepSeek R1 or Llama 4 Maverick?

Llama 4 Maverick has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,468). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.

Which is better at coding, DeepSeek R1 or Llama 4 Maverick?

DeepSeek R1 leads SWE-bench at 65.2% vs 57.1%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.

Which is cheaper to run in production?

Llama 4 Maverick output tokens are $0.8/1M versus $2.5/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.

Which is faster, DeepSeek R1 or Llama 4 Maverick?

Llama 4 Maverick has the lower time-to-first-token (170 ms vs 420 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.

Which has the larger context window?

Llama 4 Maverick accepts 1M tokens versus 64k.

Can I self-host either model?

Both DeepSeek R1 and Llama 4 Maverick are marked open-weights. Hosting cost is not in this table.

Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?

No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.

What does preference Elo mean on this page?

Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. DeepSeek R1 and Llama 4 Maverick Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

DeepSeek R1 Reasoning Scaler & Token Billing Simulator

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Intelligence & Reasoning

Speed & Latency

Pricing & Capacity

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Llama 4 Maverick

Llama 4 Maverick

Llama 4 Maverick

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Key Selection Recommendations

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

Llama vs Claude: open-weight Meta versus the Anthropic crown

Llama 4 Maverick: Meta’s natively multimodal open-weight flagship

DeepSeek R1 stays as the open-weights RL baseline

Llama 3.3 70B stays as the previous Meta 70B workhorse

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

DeepSeek R1

Llama 4 Maverick

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

DeepSeek R1 Reasoning Scaler & Token Billing Simulator

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Intelligence & Reasoning

Speed & Latency

Pricing & Capacity

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Llama 4 Maverick

Llama 4 Maverick

Llama 4 Maverick

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Key Selection Recommendations

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

Llama vs Claude: open-weight Meta versus the Anthropic crown

Llama 4 Maverick: Meta’s natively multimodal open-weight flagship

DeepSeek R1 stays as the open-weights RL baseline

Llama 3.3 70B stays as the previous Meta 70B workhorse

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

DeepSeek R1

Llama 4 Maverick

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons