DeepSeek DeepSeek R1 Distill Llama 8B vs Alibaba Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct
Detailed comparison for LLMs
DeepSeek DeepSeek R1 Distill Llama 8B and Alibaba Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct are evenly matched at about 48.0% attack success rate (ASR) on Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark. One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.
Head-to-Head Overview
It's a close match between DeepSeek R1 Distill Llama 8B and Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct!
Attack Success Rate (lower is safer)
ASR for DeepSeek DeepSeek R1 Distill Llama 8B vs Alibaba Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct. Green marks the safer model on each metric. Only the overall score is available for estimated models.
Overall (ASR)
TAP Attack Method (ASR)
Crescendo Attack Method (ASR)
Zero-Shot (ASR)
Key Highlights
No specific highlights generated for this comparison.
Security Profile
Outward is better on every axis.
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek DeepSeek R1 Distill Llama 8B or Alibaba Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct more secure?
DeepSeek DeepSeek R1 Distill Llama 8B and Alibaba Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct are evenly matched at about 48.0% attack success rate (ASR) on Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark. One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.
What is the attack success rate (ASR) of DeepSeek R1 Distill Llama 8B vs Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct?
DeepSeek R1 Distill Llama 8B has a 48.0% ASR and Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct has a 48.0% ASR — the share of adversarial prompts that succeed across zero-shot, TAP, and Crescendo attacks. Lower is safer.
How were DeepSeek R1 Distill Llama 8B and Qwen3 VL 8B Instruct tested?
Both were red-teamed with the HarmBench framework across zero-shot, TAP (Tree of Attacks with Pruning), and Crescendo multi-turn attacks, scored by Attack Success Rate.