Skip to main content

Model comparison

DeepSeek V4 Pro Base vs Exaone 4.0 32B

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 1 shared benchmark result across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

No comparison
LG AI Research
40.44/100
0 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Pro Base unranked (Not scored); Exaone 4.0 32B #170 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Pro Base and Exaone 4.0 32B share 1 comparable benchmark result. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 23 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Pro Base; 12 to Exaone 4.0 32B.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
1
DeepSeek V4 Pro Base only
23
Exaone 4.0 32B only
12
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Treat this as a split decision. DeepSeek V4 Pro Base makes more sense if you need the larger 1M context window or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model; Exaone 4.0 32B is the better fit if knowledge is the priority or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 1 shared benchmark result across 1 evidence category; 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 V4 Pro Base and Exaone 4.0 32B finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.

Exaone 4.0 32B is the reasoning model in the pair, while DeepSeek V4 Pro Base 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. DeepSeek V4 Pro Base gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for Exaone 4.0 32B.

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 V4 Pro Base and Exaone 4.0 32B
CategoryDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseΔExaone 4.0 32B
KnowledgeDeepSeek V4 Pro Base66.4Margin 15.4Exaone 4.0 32B81.8
ReasoningDeepSeek V4 Pro Base51.5MarginNo overlapExaone 4.0 32BNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · DeepSeek V4 Pro BaseB · Exaone 4.0 32B
  1. MMLU-Pro

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 73.5%B 81.8%
    Winner: Exaone 4.0 32BΔ 8.3
    MMLU-Pro: DeepSeek V4 Pro Base scored 73.5%; Exaone 4.0 32B scored 81.8%. Exaone 4.0 32B wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseExaone 4.0 32BComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseNot availableExaone 4.0 32BNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseNot availableExaone 4.0 32BNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseNot availableExaone 4.0 32BNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensDeepSeek V4 Pro Base1MExaone 4.0 32B128KDeepSeek V4 Pro Base lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseExaone 4.0 32BResult
τ²-bench resultsSource 4.1%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseExaone 4.0 32BResult
BigCodeBenchSource 59.2%Not comparable
HumanEvalSource 76.8%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 25.2%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseExaone 4.0 32BResult
BBHSource 87.5%Not comparable
DROPSource 88.7%Not comparable
HellaSwagSource 88.0%Not comparable
WinoGrandeSource 81.5%Not comparable
CLUEWSCSource 85.2%Not comparable
LongBench v2Source 51.5%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 8.0%Not comparable
CritPtSource 0.0%Not comparable
KnowledgeExaone 4.0 32B wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseExaone 4.0 32BResult
AGIEvalSource 83.1%Not comparable
MMLUSource 90.1%Not comparable
MMLU-ReduxSource 90.8%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource 73.5%81.8%Exaone 4.0 32B leads
MMMLUSource 90.3%Not comparable
C-EvalSource 93.1%Not comparable
CMMLUSource 90.8%Not comparable
MultiLoKoSource 51.1%Not comparable
SimpleQASource 55.2%Not comparable
SuperGPQASource 53.9%Not comparable
FACTS ParametricSource 62.6%Not comparable
TriviaQASource 85.6%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 6.0%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 62.8%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 4.9%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -62.3%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 10.4%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 81.0%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseExaone 4.0 32BResult
GSM8KSource 92.6%Not comparable
MATHSource 64.5%Not comparable
CMathSource 90.9%Not comparable
AIME 2025Source 85.3%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseExaone 4.0 32BResult
MGSMSource 84.4%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro BaseExaone 4.0 32BResult
AA-IFBenchSource 33.5%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Pro Base or Exaone 4.0 32B?

DeepSeek V4 Pro Base and Exaone 4.0 32B are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, DeepSeek V4 Pro Base or Exaone 4.0 32B?

Exaone 4.0 32B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.8 versus 66.4. Inside this category, MMLU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 23, 2026

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.