Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
DeepSeek V3.2
58
DeepSeek V4 Pro
71
Verified leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V3.2 unranked · DeepSeek V4 Pro #22
Pick DeepSeek V4 Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. DeepSeek V3.2 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Coding
+2.1 difference
DeepSeek V3.2
DeepSeek V4 Pro
$0.28 / $0.42
$1.74 / $3.48
35 t/s
N/A
3.75s
N/A
128K
1M
Pick DeepSeek V4 Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. DeepSeek V3.2 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
DeepSeek V4 Pro is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 71 to 58. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
DeepSeek V4 Pro is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.74 input / $3.48 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.28 input / $0.42 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V3.2. That is roughly 8.3x on output cost alone. DeepSeek V4 Pro gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for DeepSeek V3.2.
DeepSeek V4 Pro is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 71 to 58.
DeepSeek V3.2 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 60.9 versus 58.8. DeepSeek V4 Pro stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.