Composer 2 vs DeepSeek V3.1

Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.

Composer 2 is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 62 to 35. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Composer 2's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 61.7 against 32.9. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 61.7% to 29%.

Composer 2 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.50 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V3.1. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Composer 2 is the reasoning model in the pair, while DeepSeek V3.1 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Composer 2 gives you the larger context window at 200K, compared with 128K for DeepSeek V3.1.

Quick Verdict

Pick Composer 2 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. DeepSeek V3.1 only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.

Agentic

Composer 2

Composer 2

61.7

DeepSeek V3.1

32.9

61.7%
Terminal-Bench 2.0
29%
Coming soon
BrowseComp
39%
Coming soon
OSWorld-Verified
33%

Coding

Coming soon

Comparable scores for this category are coming soon. One or both models do not have sourced results here yet.

73.7%
SWE Multilingual
Coming soon
97.2%
React Native Evals
Coming soon
Coming soon
HumanEval
25%
Coming soon
SWE-bench Verified
13%
Coming soon
LiveCodeBench
15%
Coming soon
SWE-bench Pro
15%

Multimodal & Grounded

Coming soon

Comparable scores for this category are coming soon. One or both models do not have sourced results here yet.

Coming soon
MMMU-Pro
35%
Coming soon
OfficeQA Pro
45%

Reasoning

Coming soon

Comparable scores for this category are coming soon. One or both models do not have sourced results here yet.

Coming soon
MuSR
29%
Coming soon
BBH
61%
Coming soon
LongBench v2
46%

Knowledge

Coming soon

Comparable scores for this category are coming soon. One or both models do not have sourced results here yet.

Coming soon
MMLU
33%
Coming soon
GPQA
32%
Coming soon
SuperGPQA
30%
Coming soon
MMLU-Pro
53%
Coming soon
HLE
2%
Coming soon
FrontierScience
37%
Coming soon
SimpleQA
31%

Instruction Following

Coming soon

Benchmark data for this category is coming soon.

Multilingual

Coming soon

Comparable scores for this category are coming soon. One or both models do not have sourced results here yet.

Coming soon
MGSM
64%

Mathematics

Coming soon

Comparable scores for this category are coming soon. One or both models do not have sourced results here yet.

Coming soon
AIME 2023
33%
Coming soon
AIME 2024
35%
Coming soon
AIME 2025
34%
Coming soon
HMMT Feb 2023
29%
Coming soon
HMMT Feb 2024
31%
Coming soon
HMMT Feb 2025
30%
Coming soon
BRUMO 2025
32%

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better, Composer 2 or DeepSeek V3.1?

Composer 2 is ahead overall, 62 to 35. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 61.7% and 29%.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Composer 2 or DeepSeek V3.1?

Composer 2 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 61.7 versus 32.9. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Last updated: March 18, 2026

Weekly LLM Benchmark Digest

Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.