Model comparison
DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) vs Holo3-122B-A10B
Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) and Holo3-122B-A10B share 0 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 48 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max); 1 to Holo3-122B-A10B.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) only
- 48
- Holo3-122B-A10B only
- 1
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) makes more sense if you want the cheaper token bill or you need the larger 1M context window; Holo3-122B-A10B is the better fit if agentic is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 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 V4 Pro (Max) and Holo3-122B-A10B 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.
Holo3-122B-A10B is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.40 input / $3.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.43 input / $0.87 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max). That is roughly 3.4x on output cost alone. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) is the reasoning model in the pair, while Holo3-122B-A10B 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 (Max) gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 64K for Holo3-122B-A10B.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | Holo3-122B-A10B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)$0.435 input / $0.87 output | Holo3-122B-A10B$0.4 input / $3 output | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Not available | Holo3-122B-A10BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Not available | Holo3-122B-A10BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)1M | Holo3-122B-A10B64K | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticHolo3-122B-A10B wins18 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | Holo3-122B-A10B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 67.9% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 83.4% | — | Not comparable |
| 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 |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 78.8% | Not comparable |
Coding8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | Holo3-122B-A10B | 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 |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
Knowledge13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | Holo3-122B-A10B | 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% | — | Not comparable |
| 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 |
Math4 benchmarks
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | Holo3-122B-A10B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1264 | — | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | Holo3-122B-A10B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 76.5% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) or Holo3-122B-A10B?
DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) and Holo3-122B-A10B 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 agentic tasks, DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) or Holo3-122B-A10B?
Holo3-122B-A10B has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 78.9 versus 74.5. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) 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.