Skip to main content

Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs DeepSeek V3.2

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 5 shared benchmark results across 3 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

53.61/100
Margin
1.8pts
winning →
55.4/100
1 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Sonnet 4.5 #96 (Estimated); DeepSeek V3.2 #82 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Sonnet 4.5 and DeepSeek V3.2 share 5 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 7 results are unique to Claude Sonnet 4.5; 14 to DeepSeek V3.2.

Updated July 22, 2026
Shared results
5
Claude Sonnet 4.5 only
7
DeepSeek V3.2 only
14
Comparable categories
2 / 8

Pick DeepSeek V3.2 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude Sonnet 4.5 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you need the larger 200K context window.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 5 shared benchmark results across 3 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

DeepSeek V3.2 has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 55.4 versus 53.61. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.

DeepSeek V3.2's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 17.1 against 11.2. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), 13.495% to 22.100%. Claude Sonnet 4.5 does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $3.00 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.28 input / $0.42 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V3.2. That is roughly 35.7x on output cost alone. Claude Sonnet 4.5 gives you the larger context window at 200K, compared with 128K for DeepSeek V3.2.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Claude Sonnet 4.5 and DeepSeek V3.2
CategoryClaude Sonnet 4.5ΔDeepSeek V3.2
CodingClaude Sonnet 4.577.2Margin 16.3DeepSeek V3.260.9
MathClaude Sonnet 4.511.2Margin 5.9DeepSeek V3.217.1
AgenticClaude Sonnet 4.555.4MarginNo overlapDeepSeek V3.2Not measured
ReasoningClaude Sonnet 4.513.6MarginNo overlapDeepSeek V3.2Not measured
KnowledgeClaude Sonnet 4.583.4MarginNo overlapDeepSeek V3.2Not measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Claude Sonnet 4.5B · DeepSeek V3.2
  1. FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 13.495%B 22.100%
    Winner: DeepSeek V3.2Δ 8.6
    FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Claude Sonnet 4.5 scored 13.495%; DeepSeek V3.2 scored 22.100%. DeepSeek V3.2 wins this benchmark.
  2. FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 4.167%B 2.100%
    Winner: Claude Sonnet 4.5Δ 2.1
    FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): Claude Sonnet 4.5 scored 4.167%; DeepSeek V3.2 scored 2.100%. Claude Sonnet 4.5 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude Sonnet 4.5DeepSeek V3.2Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Sonnet 4.5$3 input / $15 outputDeepSeek V3.2$0.28 input / $0.42 outputDeepSeek V3.2 has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Sonnet 4.5Not availableDeepSeek V3.235 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Sonnet 4.5Not availableDeepSeek V3.23.75 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Sonnet 4.5200KDeepSeek V3.2128KClaude Sonnet 4.5 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5DeepSeek V3.2Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 50%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 61.4%Not comparable
VITA-BenchSource 17.0%18.5%DeepSeek V3.2 leads
Gert LabsSource 48.51%29.57%Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads
JobBenchSource 27.7%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 40.2%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 78.9%Not comparable
CodingClaude Sonnet 4.5 wins
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5DeepSeek V3.2Result
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 77.2%Not comparable
SWE-RebenchSource 60.9%Not comparable
React Native EvalsSource 71.5%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 38.7%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5DeepSeek V3.2Result
ARC-AGI-2Source 13.6%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 39.0%Not comparable
CritPtSource 0.9%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5DeepSeek V3.2Result
GPQASource 83.4%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 24.7%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 75.1%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 10.5%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -46.7%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 24.2%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 93.5%Not comparable
MathDeepSeek V3.2 wins
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5DeepSeek V3.2Result
AIME 2025Source 87%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 13.495%22.100%DeepSeek V3.2 leads
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 4.167%2.100%Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5DeepSeek V3.2Result
Design Arena WebsiteSource 12191204Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5DeepSeek V3.2Result
AA-IFBenchSource 49.0%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Which is better, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or DeepSeek V3.2?

DeepSeek V3.2 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 55.4 to 53.61. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 13.495% and 22.100%.

Which is better for coding, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or DeepSeek V3.2?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 77.2 versus 60.9. DeepSeek V3.2 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Which is better for math, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or DeepSeek V3.2?

DeepSeek V3.2 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 17.1 versus 11.2. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 22, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.