Skip to main content

Model comparison

DeepSeek V3.2 vs o3-mini

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.

54.55/100
Margin
8.0pts
← winning
OpenAI
46.59/100
1 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V3.2 #88 (Supported); o3-mini #141 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. DeepSeek V3.2 and o3-mini share 5 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 14 results are unique to DeepSeek V3.2; 5 to o3-mini.

Updated July 24, 2026
Shared results
5
DeepSeek V3.2 only
14
o3-mini only
5
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick DeepSeek V3.2 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. o3-mini only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 200K context window or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 5 shared benchmark results across 3 evidence categories; 1 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 46.59. 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 49.3.

o3-mini is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.10 input / $4.40 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.28 input / $0.42 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V3.2. That is roughly 10.5x on output cost alone. o3-mini is the reasoning model in the pair, while DeepSeek V3.2 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. o3-mini 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 DeepSeek V3.2 and o3-mini
CategoryDeepSeek V3.2Δo3-mini
CodingDeepSeek V3.260.9Margin 11.6o3-mini49.3
KnowledgeDeepSeek V3.2Not measuredMarginNo overlapo3-mini77.2
MathDeepSeek V3.217.1MarginNo overlapo3-miniNot measured
Inst. FollowingDeepSeek V3.2Not measuredMarginNo overlapo3-mini93.9

Operational comparison

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

MetricDeepSeek V3.2o3-miniComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensDeepSeek V3.2$0.28 input / $0.42 outputo3-mini$1.1 input / $4.4 outputDeepSeek V3.2 has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondDeepSeek V3.235 tok/so3-mini160 tok/so3-mini has the higher measured throughput.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenDeepSeek V3.23.75 so3-mini7.12 sDeepSeek V3.2 reaches the first token sooner.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensDeepSeek V3.2128Ko3-mini200Ko3-mini lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2o3-miniResult
Claw-EvalSource 40.2%Not comparable
VITA-BenchSource 18.5%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 78.9%28.7%DeepSeek V3.2 leads
Gert LabsSource 29.57%Not comparable
CodingDeepSeek V3.2 wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2o3-miniResult
SWE-RebenchSource 60.9%Not comparable
React Native EvalsSource 71.5%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 38.7%39.9%o3-mini leads
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 49.3%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2o3-miniResult
AA-LCRSource 39.0%Not comparable
CritPtSource 0.9%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2o3-miniResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 24.7%19.0%DeepSeek V3.2 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 75.1%74.8%DeepSeek V3.2 leads
AA-HLESource 10.5%8.7%DeepSeek V3.2 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -46.7%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 24.2%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 93.5%Not comparable
MMLUSource 86.9%Not comparable
GPQASource 77.2%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2o3-miniResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 22.100%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 2.100%Not comparable
AIME 2024Source 87.3%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2o3-miniResult
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1204Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2o3-miniResult
AA-IFBenchSource 49.0%Not comparable
IFEvalSource 93.9%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, DeepSeek V3.2 or o3-mini?

DeepSeek V3.2 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 54.55 to 46.59.

Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V3.2 or o3-mini?

DeepSeek V3.2 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 60.9 versus 49.3. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 24, 2026