Model comparison
DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) vs o1
Head-to-head evidence from 13 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) #81 (Estimated); o1 #129 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) and o1 share 13 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 25 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Pro (High); 3 to o1.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 13
- DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) only
- 25
- o1 only
- 3
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. o1 only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 13 shared benchmark results across 5 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 V4 Pro (High) is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 55.47 to 48.1. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)'s sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 94 against 9.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 89.1% to 75.7%. o1 does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
o1 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $15.00 input / $60.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.43 input / $0.87 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V4 Pro (High). That is roughly 69.0x on output cost alone. DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for o1.
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 Pro (High) | Δ | o1 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)94.0 | Margin← 84.7 | o19.3 |
| Knowledge | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)57.0 | Margin→ 18.7 | o175.7 |
| Agentic | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)70.6 | MarginNo overlap | o1Not measured |
| Coding | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)69.8 | MarginNo overlap | o1Not measured |
| Inst. Following | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)Not measured | MarginNo overlap | o192.2 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 89.1%B 75.7%Winner: DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)Δ 13.4GPQA: DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) scored 89.1%; o1 scored 75.7%. DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) | o1 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)$0.435 input / $0.87 output | o1$15 input / $60 output | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)Not available | o198 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)Not available | o132.29 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)1M | o1200K | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) | o1 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 63.3% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 80.4% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | 44.7% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 74.2% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 49% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 94.2% | 62.6% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 39.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1299 | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 34.4% | — | Not comparable |
Coding7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) | o1 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| CodeforcesSource | 2919.0 | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 79.4% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 54.4% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 74.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 63.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 46.4% | 35.8% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 58.7% | 39.7% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
Knowledgeo1 wins13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) | o1 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 87.1% | — | Not comparable |
| SimpleQASource | 46.2% | — | Not comparable |
| Chinese-SimpleQASource | 77.7% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | 89.1% | 75.7% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
| GPQA-DSource | 89.1% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 34.5% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 43.1% | 23.4% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 90.5% | 74.7% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
| AA-HLESource | 33.5% | 7.7% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -9.7% | -10.5% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 41.8% | 34.7% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 88.6% | 69.3% | o1 leads |
| MMLUSource | — | 91.8% | Not comparable |
MathDeepSeek V4 Pro (High) wins5 benchmarks
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) | o1 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1264 | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) or o1?
DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 55.47 to 48.1. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 89.1% and 75.7%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) or o1?
o1 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 75.7 versus 57. Inside this category, AA-HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) or o1?
DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 94 versus 9.3. o1 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
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.