Model comparison
DeepSeek V3.2 vs GPT-4.1 mini
Head-to-head evidence from 13 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V3.2 #88 (Supported); GPT-4.1 mini #160 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. DeepSeek V3.2 and GPT-4.1 mini share 13 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 6 results are unique to DeepSeek V3.2; 9 to GPT-4.1 mini.
Updated July 24, 2026- Shared results
- 13
- DeepSeek V3.2 only
- 6
- GPT-4.1 mini only
- 9
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick DeepSeek V3.2 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-4.1 mini only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 1M context window.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 13 shared benchmark results across 7 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 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 54.55 to 43.1. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
DeepSeek V3.2's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 60.9 against 23.6. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), 22.100% to 4.483%.
GPT-4.1 mini is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.40 input / $1.60 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.28 input / $0.42 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V3.2. That is roughly 3.8x on output cost alone. GPT-4.1 mini gives you the larger context window at 1M, 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 | DeepSeek V3.2 | Δ | GPT-4.1 mini |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | DeepSeek V3.260.9 | Margin← 37.3 | GPT-4.1 mini23.6 |
| Math | DeepSeek V3.217.1 | Margin← 12.6 | GPT-4.1 mini4.5 |
| Knowledge | DeepSeek V3.2Not measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-4.1 mini64.2 |
| Inst. Following | DeepSeek V3.2Not measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-4.1 mini88.5 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 22.100%B 4.483%Winner: DeepSeek V3.2Δ 17.6FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): DeepSeek V3.2 scored 22.100%; GPT-4.1 mini scored 4.483%. DeepSeek V3.2 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | DeepSeek V3.2 | GPT-4.1 mini | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek V3.2$0.28 input / $0.42 output | GPT-4.1 mini$0.4 input / $1.6 output | DeepSeek V3.2 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | DeepSeek V3.235 tok/s | GPT-4.1 mini80 tok/s | GPT-4.1 mini has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek V3.23.75 s | GPT-4.1 mini0.76 s | GPT-4.1 mini reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek V3.2128K | GPT-4.1 mini1M | GPT-4.1 mini lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V3.2 | GPT-4.1 mini | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claw-EvalSource | 40.2% | — | Not comparable |
| VITA-BenchSource | 18.5% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 78.9% | 52.9% | DeepSeek V3.2 leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 29.57% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 1.7% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 0.4% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 508 | Not comparable |
CodingDeepSeek V3.2 wins5 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V3.2 | GPT-4.1 mini | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 24.7% | 14.8% | DeepSeek V3.2 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 75.1% | 66.4% | DeepSeek V3.2 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 10.5% | 4.6% | DeepSeek V3.2 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -46.7% | -50.1% | DeepSeek V3.2 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 24.2% | 17.5% | DeepSeek V3.2 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 93.5% | 82.0% | GPT-4.1 mini leads |
| MMLUSource | — | 87.5% | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | — | 64.2% | Not comparable |
MathDeepSeek V3.2 wins2 benchmarks
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, DeepSeek V3.2 or GPT-4.1 mini?
DeepSeek V3.2 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 54.55 to 43.1. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 22.100% and 4.483%.
Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V3.2 or GPT-4.1 mini?
DeepSeek V3.2 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 60.9 versus 23.6. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, DeepSeek V3.2 or GPT-4.1 mini?
DeepSeek V3.2 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 17.1 versus 4.5. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.