Model comparison
DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) 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 Pro (Max) unranked (Not scored); GPT-5.4 Pro #44 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) and GPT-5.4 Pro share 3 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 45 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max); 9 to GPT-5.4 Pro.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 3
- DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) only
- 45
- GPT-5.4 Pro only
- 9
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) makes more sense if mathematics is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill; GPT-5.4 Pro is the better fit if agentic is the priority or you need the larger 1.05M context window.
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
DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) and GPT-5.4 Pro 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.
GPT-5.4 Pro is also the more expensive model on tokens at $30.00 input / $180.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.43 input / $0.87 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max). That is roughly 206.9x on output cost alone. GPT-5.4 Pro gives you the larger context window at 1.05M, compared with 1M for DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max).
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 (Max) | Δ | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)95.2 | Margin← 48.3 | GPT-5.4 Pro46.9 |
| Agentic | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)74.5 | Margin→ 14.8 | GPT-5.4 Pro89.3 |
| Knowledge | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)60.1 | Margin← 1.4 | GPT-5.4 Pro58.7 |
| Coding | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)70.9 | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.4 ProNot measured |
| Reasoning | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Not measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.4 Pro83.3 |
| Multimodal | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)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 ↗
HLE
KnowledgeA 37.7%B 58.7%Winner: GPT-5.4 ProΔ 21HLE: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) scored 37.7%; GPT-5.4 Pro scored 58.7%. GPT-5.4 Pro wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
BrowseComp
AgenticA 83.4%B 89.3%Winner: GPT-5.4 ProΔ 5.9BrowseComp: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) scored 83.4%; GPT-5.4 Pro scored 89.3%. 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 Pro (Max) | GPT-5.4 Pro | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)$0.435 input / $0.87 output | GPT-5.4 Pro$30 input / $180 output | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Not available | GPT-5.4 Pro74 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Not available | GPT-5.4 Pro151.79 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)1M | GPT-5.4 Pro1.05M | GPT-5.4 Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticGPT-5.4 Pro wins17 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | GPT-5.4 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 67.9% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 83.4% | 89.3% | GPT-5.4 Pro leads |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | 48.2% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 73.6% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1307 | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 51.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 36.4% | — | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | 24.3% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 96.2% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 40.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 932 | — | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | 40.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | 84.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | 38.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 25.8% | — | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | 46.2% | — | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | 64% | — | Not comparable |
Coding8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | GPT-5.4 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| CodeforcesSource | 3206.0 | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 80.6% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 55.4% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 76.2% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 67.9% | — | Not comparable |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 49.93% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 59.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 50.0% | — | Not comparable |
Reasoning5 benchmarks
KnowledgeDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) wins16 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | GPT-5.4 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 87.5% | — | Not comparable |
| SimpleQASource | 57.9% | — | Not comparable |
| Chinese-SimpleQASource | 84.4% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | 90.1% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 90.1% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 37.7% | 58.7% | GPT-5.4 Pro leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 44.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 88.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 35.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -10.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 43.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 94.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Openness IndexSource | 50.0% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierScienceSource | — | 36.7% | Not comparable |
| FrontierScience ResearchSource | — | 36.7% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 42.7% | Not comparable |
MathDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) wins8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | GPT-5.4 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| HMMT Feb 2026Source | 95.2% | — | Not comparable |
| IMOAnswerBenchSource | 89.8% | — | Not comparable |
| ApexSource | 38.3% | — | Not comparable |
| Apex ShortlistSource | 90.2% | — | 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 Pro (Max) | GPT-5.4 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 76.5% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) or GPT-5.4 Pro?
DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) and GPT-5.4 Pro 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 (Max) or GPT-5.4 Pro?
DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 60.1 versus 58.7. Inside this category, HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) or GPT-5.4 Pro?
DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 95.2 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 Pro (Max) or GPT-5.4 Pro?
GPT-5.4 Pro has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 89.3 versus 74.5. 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.