Mistral Ministral 3 3B Reasoning 2512 vs DeepSeek DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp
Detailed comparison for LLMs
Mistral Ministral 3 3B Reasoning 2512 and DeepSeek DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp are evenly matched at about 46.0% 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 Ministral 3 3B Reasoning 2512 and DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp!
Attack Success Rate (lower is safer)
ASR for Mistral Ministral 3 3B Reasoning 2512 vs DeepSeek DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp. 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 Mistral Ministral 3 3B Reasoning 2512 or DeepSeek DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp more secure?
Mistral Ministral 3 3B Reasoning 2512 and DeepSeek DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp are evenly matched at about 46.0% 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 Ministral 3 3B Reasoning 2512 vs DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp?
Ministral 3 3B Reasoning 2512 has a 46.0% ASR and DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp has a 46.0% ASR — the share of adversarial prompts that succeed across zero-shot, TAP, and Crescendo attacks. Lower is safer.
How were Ministral 3 3B Reasoning 2512 and DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp 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.