Evidence Hub

Meta-analysis of large language models: benchmarking DeepSeek-R1 against ChatGPT, Gemini, Qwen, and LLaMA

S. Awan, Muazzam Ali Khan Khattak, Abdullah Ayub Khan, Anwar Ali Sathio, J. Alsayaydeh, Rex Bacarra, S. G. Herawan, Rehman Aziz

Journal of Big Data, 2025

5 citations

Abstract

The rapid evolution of large language models (LLMs), GPT-4 Turbo, Google Gemini, Qwen, Meta’s LLaMA 3.1, and DeepSeek-R1 has redefined the landscape of artificial intelligence. In the study, we conduct a hybrid meta-analysis integrating publicly available benchmarks, model cards, technical reports, and open-source repositories to evaluate LLMs across both performance and operational dimensions. Quantitative data were aggregated from standardized tasks such as MMLU (reasoning), HumanEval (code generation), FLORES-200 (translation), and TyDiQA (multilingual Q&A), complemented by efficiency metrics including FLOPs, GPU hours, inference latency, and subscription costs. A big data–driven KPI framework covering scalability index, data-throughput rate, energy per token, and training cost efficiency was applied to enable normalized, cross-model comparison. Results indicate that DeepSeek-R1 demonstrates strong coding and multilingual efficiency, ChatGPT-4 Turbo leads in reasoning accuracy, Gemini Ultra excels in multimodal inference, Qwen is competitive in Chinese-language tasks, and LLaMA 3.1 remains the most adaptable open-source option. Across datasets, DeepSeek-R1 achieved 80.2 ± 1.5% on HumanEval and 78.5 ± 1.8% on MMLU, compared with ChatGPT-4 Turbo’s 86.5 ± 1.9%; these gaps fall within observed heterogeneity (I2 = 14.6%). The findings highlight trade-offs among accuracy, scalability, and cost efficiency, emphasizing the need for transparent, sustainable, and multimodal LLM…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free