Model comparison
DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) vs GPT-5.4 Pro
Head-to-head evidence from 3 shared benchmark results across 3 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) #92 (Estimated); GPT-5.4 Pro #44 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) and GPT-5.4 Pro share 3 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 35 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Flash (High); 9 to GPT-5.4 Pro.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 3
- DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) only
- 35
- GPT-5.4 Pro only
- 9
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Pick GPT-5.4 Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 3 shared benchmark results across 3 evidence categories; 3 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
GPT-5.4 Pro is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 60.89 to 53.95. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GPT-5.4 Pro's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 89.3 against 55.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is BrowseComp, 53.5% to 89.3%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) does hit back in mathematics, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
GPT-5.4 Pro is also the more expensive model on tokens at $30.00 input / $180.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.14 input / $0.28 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V4 Flash (High). That is roughly 642.9x on output cost alone. GPT-5.4 Pro gives you the larger context window at 1.05M, compared with 1M for DeepSeek V4 Flash (High).
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 V4 Flash (High) | Δ | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)91.9 | Margin← 45.0 | GPT-5.4 Pro46.9 |
| Agentic | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)55.3 | Margin→ 34.0 | GPT-5.4 Pro89.3 |
| Knowledge | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)52.1 | Margin→ 6.6 | GPT-5.4 Pro58.7 |
| Coding | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)68.5 | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.4 ProNot measured |
| Reasoning | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Not measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.4 Pro83.3 |
| Multimodal | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Not measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.4 Pro94.0 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
BrowseComp
AgenticA 53.5%B 89.3%Winner: GPT-5.4 ProΔ 35.8BrowseComp: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) scored 53.5%; GPT-5.4 Pro scored 89.3%. GPT-5.4 Pro wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
HLE
KnowledgeA 29.4%B 58.7%Winner: GPT-5.4 ProΔ 29.3HLE: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) scored 29.4%; GPT-5.4 Pro scored 58.7%. GPT-5.4 Pro wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) | GPT-5.4 Pro | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)$0.14 input / $0.28 output | GPT-5.4 Pro$30 input / $180 output | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Not available | GPT-5.4 Pro74 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Not available | GPT-5.4 Pro151.79 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)1M | GPT-5.4 Pro1.05M | GPT-5.4 Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticGPT-5.4 Pro wins9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) | GPT-5.4 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 56.6% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 53.5% | 89.3% | GPT-5.4 Pro leads |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | 40.3% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 67.4% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 43.5% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 95.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 28.2% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 32.4% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1147 | — | Not comparable |
Coding7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) | GPT-5.4 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| CodeforcesSource | 2816.0 | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 78.6% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 52.3% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 70.2% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 56.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 42.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 52.0% | — | Not comparable |
Reasoning5 benchmarks
KnowledgeGPT-5.4 Pro wins15 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) | GPT-5.4 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 86.4% | — | Not comparable |
| SimpleQASource | 28.9% | — | Not comparable |
| Chinese-SimpleQASource | 73.2% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | 87.4% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 87.4% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 29.4% | 58.7% | GPT-5.4 Pro leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 37.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 86.7% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 27.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -22.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 35.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 89.7% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierScienceSource | — | 36.7% | Not comparable |
| FrontierScience ResearchSource | — | 36.7% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 42.7% | Not comparable |
MathDeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) | GPT-5.4 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| HMMT Feb 2026Source | 91.9% | — | Not comparable |
| IMOAnswerBenchSource | 85.1% | — | Not comparable |
| ApexSource | 19.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Apex ShortlistSource | 72.1% | — | Not comparable |
| IPhO 2025 (Theory)Source | — | 93.5% | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath (legacy)Source | — | 50% | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source | — | 50.000% | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source | — | 37.500% | Not comparable |
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) | GPT-5.4 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 73.5% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or GPT-5.4 Pro?
GPT-5.4 Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 60.89 to 53.95. The biggest single separator in this matchup is BrowseComp, where the scores are 53.5% and 89.3%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or GPT-5.4 Pro?
GPT-5.4 Pro has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 58.7 versus 52.1. Inside this category, HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or GPT-5.4 Pro?
DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 91.9 versus 46.9. GPT-5.4 Pro stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Which is better for agentic tasks, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or GPT-5.4 Pro?
GPT-5.4 Pro has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 89.3 versus 55.3. Inside this category, BrowseComp is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
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.