# Quantifying the Capability Boundary of DeepSeek Models: An Application-Driven Performance Analysis

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.11164 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.11164/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 8 of its 16 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 16 Feb 2025.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/lr/reasoning-benchmarks-and-evaluation/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 8 of 8)

- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.03300/) (2020)
- [Scaling Laws for Neural Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.08361/) (2020)
- [DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.12948/) (2025)
- [LiveCodeBench: Holistic and Contamination Free Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.07974/) (2024)
- [Scaling Laws for Reward Model Overoptimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.10760/) (2022)
- [C-Eval: A Multi-Level Multi-Discipline Chinese Evaluation Suite for Foundation Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.08322/) (2023)
- [What is the best model? Application-driven Evaluation for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.10307/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [Token-Operations-Oriented Inference Optimization Techniques for Large Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.20295/) (2026)
- [PersonaPath: Towards Knowledge-Centric Personalized Learning Path Planning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.18861/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

DeepSeek-R1, known for its low training cost and exceptional reasoning capabilities, has achieved state-of-the-art performance on various benchmarks. However, detailed evaluations for DeepSeek Series models from the perspective of real-world applications are lacking, making it challenging for users to select the most suitable DeepSeek models for their specific needs. To address this gap, we presents the first comprehensive evaluation of the DeepSeek and its related models (including DeepSeek-V3, DeepSeek-R1, DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen series, DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Llama series, their corresponding 4-bit quantized models, and the reasoning model QwQ-32B) using our enhanced A-Eval benchmark, A-Eval-2.0. Our systematic analysis reveals several key insights: (1) Given identical model architectures and training data, larger parameter models demonstrate superior performance, aligning with the scaling law. However, smaller models may achieve enhanced capabilities when employing optimized training strategies and higher-quality data; (2) Reasoning-enhanced model show significant performance gains in logical reasoning tasks but may underperform in text understanding and generation tasks; (3) As the data difficulty increases, distillation or reasoning enhancements yield higher performance gains for the models. Interestingly, reasoning enhancements can even have a negative impact on simpler problems; (4) Quantization impacts different capabilities unevenly, with significant drop on logical reasoning and minimal impact on text generation. Based on these results and findings, we design an model selection handbook enabling users to select the most cost-effective models without efforts.