Model comparison
DeepSeek V4 Pro vs Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
Head-to-head evidence from 3 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Pro #46 (Supported); Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Pro and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite share 3 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 20 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Pro; 18 to Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite.
Updated July 21, 2026- Shared results
- 3
- DeepSeek V4 Pro only
- 20
- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite only
- 18
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. DeepSeek V4 Pro makes more sense if coding is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill; Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is the better fit if agentic is the priority or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 3 shared benchmark results across 2 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 and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite 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.
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.30 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.43 input / $0.87 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V4 Pro. That is roughly 2.9x on output cost alone. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is the reasoning model in the pair, while DeepSeek V4 Pro 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.
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 | Δ | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | DeepSeek V4 Pro65.3 | Margin← 11.1 | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite54.2 |
| Agentic | DeepSeek V4 Pro59.1 | Margin→ 4.3 | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite63.4 |
| Reasoning | DeepSeek V4 ProNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite72.2 |
| Knowledge | DeepSeek V4 Pro41.3 | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measured |
| Math | DeepSeek V4 Pro31.7 | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 59.1%B 54%Winner: DeepSeek V4 ProΔ 5.1Terminal-Bench 2.0: DeepSeek V4 Pro scored 59.1%; Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite scored 54%. DeepSeek V4 Pro wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 52.1%B 54.2%Winner: Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteΔ 2.1SWE-bench Pro: DeepSeek V4 Pro scored 52.1%; Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite scored 54.2%. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek V4 Pro$0.435 input / $0.87 output | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite$0.3 input / $2.5 output | DeepSeek V4 Pro has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | DeepSeek V4 ProNot available | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek V4 ProNot available | Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek V4 Pro1M | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite1M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 59.1% | 54% | DeepSeek V4 Pro leads |
| MCP AtlasSource | 69.4% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 46.3% | — | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | 59.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | 50.28% | — | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | 17.1% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 74% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1140 | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 26.8% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 32.0% | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 634 | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | — | 16.5% | Not comparable |
CodingDeepSeek V4 Pro wins6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 73.6% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 52.1% | 54.2% | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 69.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 59.1% | 54.0% | DeepSeek V4 Pro leads |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 49.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | — | 40.9% | Not comparable |
Reasoning5 benchmarks
Knowledge12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 82.9% | — | Not comparable |
| SimpleQASource | 45% | — | Not comparable |
| Chinese-SimpleQASource | 75.8% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | 72.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 72.9% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 7.7% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 36.5% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 83.8% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 17.5% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | 6.9% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 30.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 33.5% | Not comparable |
Math4 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Pro or Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite?
DeepSeek V4 Pro and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite 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 coding, DeepSeek V4 Pro or Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite?
DeepSeek V4 Pro has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 65.3 versus 54.2. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, DeepSeek V4 Pro or Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite?
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 63.4 versus 59.1. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 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.