Skip to main content

Model comparison

DeepSeek V4 Pro vs GPT-5.2

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 5 shared benchmark results across 4 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

60.66/100
Margin
2.2pts
← winning
OpenAI
58.43/100
1 category wins3 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Pro #46 (Supported); GPT-5.2 #64 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Pro and GPT-5.2 share 5 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 18 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Pro; 23 to GPT-5.2.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
5
DeepSeek V4 Pro only
18
GPT-5.2 only
23
Comparable categories
4 / 8

Pick DeepSeek V4 Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-5.2 only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 5 shared benchmark results across 4 evidence categories; 4 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 has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 60.66 versus 58.43. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.

DeepSeek V4 Pro's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 59.1 against 55.7. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 72.9% to 92.4%. GPT-5.2 does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

GPT-5.2 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.75 input / $14.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.43 input / $0.87 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V4 Pro. That is roughly 16.1x on output cost alone. GPT-5.2 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. DeepSeek V4 Pro gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 400K for GPT-5.2.

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 and GPT-5.2
CategoryDeepSeek V4 ProΔGPT-5.2
KnowledgeDeepSeek V4 Pro41.3Margin 51.1GPT-5.292.4
CodingDeepSeek V4 Pro65.3Margin 5.3GPT-5.270.6
MathDeepSeek V4 Pro31.7Margin 3.5GPT-5.235.2
AgenticDeepSeek V4 Pro59.1Margin 3.4GPT-5.255.7
ReasoningDeepSeek V4 ProNot measuredMarginNo overlapGPT-5.252.9
MultimodalDeepSeek V4 ProNot measuredMarginNo overlapGPT-5.280.4

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · DeepSeek V4 ProB · GPT-5.2
  1. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 72.9%B 92.4%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 19.5
    GPQA: DeepSeek V4 Pro scored 72.9%; GPT-5.2 scored 92.4%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.
  2. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 73.6%B 80%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 6.4
    SWE-bench Verified: DeepSeek V4 Pro scored 73.6%; GPT-5.2 scored 80%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.
  3. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 52.1%B 55.6%
    Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 3.5
    SWE-bench Pro: DeepSeek V4 Pro scored 52.1%; GPT-5.2 scored 55.6%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricDeepSeek V4 ProGPT-5.2Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensDeepSeek V4 Pro$0.435 input / $0.87 outputGPT-5.2$1.75 input / $14 outputDeepSeek V4 Pro has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondDeepSeek V4 ProNot availableGPT-5.273 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenDeepSeek V4 ProNot availableGPT-5.2130.34 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensDeepSeek V4 Pro1MGPT-5.2400KDeepSeek V4 Pro lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticDeepSeek V4 Pro wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 ProGPT-5.2Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 59.1%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 69.4%Not comparable
ToolathlonSource 46.3%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 59.8%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 50.28%46.54%DeepSeek V4 Pro leads
ResearchClawBenchSource 17.1%Not comparable
BrowseCompSource 65.8%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 47.3%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 84.8%Not comparable
JobBenchSource 34.3%Not comparable
CodingGPT-5.2 wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 ProGPT-5.2Result
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 73.6%80%GPT-5.2 leads
SWE-bench ProSource 52.1%55.6%GPT-5.2 leads
SWE MultilingualSource 69.8%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 59.1%Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource 53.50%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 52.1%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 ProGPT-5.2Result
MRCR 1MSource 44.7%Not comparable
CorpusQA 1MSource 35.6%Not comparable
ARC-AGI-2Source 52.9%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 72.7%Not comparable
CritPtSource 11.6%Not comparable
KnowledgeGPT-5.2 wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 ProGPT-5.2Result
MMLU-ProSource 82.9%Not comparable
SimpleQASource 45%Not comparable
Chinese-SimpleQASource 75.8%Not comparable
GPQASource 72.9%92.4%GPT-5.2 leads
GPQA-DSource 72.9%Not comparable
HLESource 7.7%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 42.2%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 90.3%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 35.4%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -1.0%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 43.8%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 79.7%Not comparable
MathGPT-5.2 wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 ProGPT-5.2Result
HMMT Feb 2026Source 31.7%Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource 35.3%Not comparable
ApexSource 0.4%Not comparable
Apex ShortlistSource 9.2%Not comparable
AA AIME 2025Source 99.0%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 40.700%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 18.800%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 ProGPT-5.2Result
Design Arena WebsiteSource 12641224DeepSeek V4 Pro leads
MMMU-ProSource 79.5%Not comparable
MathVisionSource 83.0%Not comparable
CharXivSource 82.1%Not comparable
V*Source 75.9%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 ProGPT-5.2Result
AA-IFBenchSource 75.4%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (5)

Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Pro or GPT-5.2?

DeepSeek V4 Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 60.66 to 58.43. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 72.9% and 92.4%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, DeepSeek V4 Pro or GPT-5.2?

GPT-5.2 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 92.4 versus 41.3. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V4 Pro or GPT-5.2?

GPT-5.2 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 70.6 versus 65.3. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, DeepSeek V4 Pro or GPT-5.2?

GPT-5.2 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 35.2 versus 31.7. DeepSeek V4 Pro stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Which is better for agentic tasks, DeepSeek V4 Pro or GPT-5.2?

DeepSeek V4 Pro has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 59.1 versus 55.7. Inside this category, Gert Labs 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.