DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GPT-5.2
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 
GPT-5.2 Verdict
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (max) and GPT-5.2 (xhigh) are level on quality (61.9 vs 62.0).
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (max) is stronger in agents & tools, coding, composite, knowledge, long context, multimodal, reasoning.
- GPT-5.2 (xhigh) is stronger in instruction following, maths.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (max) is 18× cheaper ($0.262 vs $4.81 per 1M blended).
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (max) streams 3.2× faster (215 vs 67 tokens per second).
| Metric | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (max) | GPT-5.2 (xhigh) |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 61.9 | 62.0 |
| Agents & tools score | 59.6 | 56.4 |
| Coding score | 68.9 | 63.2 |
| Composite score | 74.5 | 67.6 |
| Knowledge score | 61.7 | 57.9 |
| Long context score | 68.5 | 67.8 |
| Multimodal score | 61.4 | – |
| Reasoning score | 69.5 | 62.8 |
| Instruction following score | – | 73.4 |
| Maths score | – | 58.4 |
| Blended price $/M | $0.262 | $4.81 |
| Output speed | 215 tok/s | 67 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 10.5 s | 94.0 s |
| Context window | 1M | 400k |
| GPQA Diamond | – | 91.4% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | – | 67.4% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | – | 31.7% |
| OTIS Mock AIME | – | 96.1% |
| SimpleQA Verified | – | 37.1% |
| WeirdML | – | 72.2% |
| APEX-Agents | – | 34.4% |
| ProofBench | – | 15.0% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1614 | – |
| LMArena Agent | 4.9 | – |
| LiveBench | 81.1% | – |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 86.7% | – |
| LiveBench Coding | 80.0% | – |
| LiveBench Agentic Coding | 77.3% | – |
| LiveBench Mathematics | 93.3% | – |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 79.3% | – |
| LiveBench Language | 81.2% | – |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 70.0% | – |
| AA Intelligence Index | 39.5 | 30.4 |
| IFBench | – | 75.4% |
| AA-LCR | 84.0% | 82.7% |
| MMMU-Pro | 77.0% | – |
| AA-Omniscience | -5.3 | -0.9 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | – | 47.0% |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | – | 90.3% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 39.3% | 37.7% |
| SciCode (AA) | 51.9% | – |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | – | 84.8% |
| AIME (Vals) | – | 96.9% |
| LiveCodeBench | – | 85.4% |
| MMLU-Pro | – | 86.2% |
| LegalBench | – | 82.8% |
| CorpFin | – | 65.9% |
| TaxEval | – | 75.8% |
| MedQA | – | 94.1% |
| MGSM | – | 94.0% |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | – | 75.8% |
| GPQA Diamond (Vals) | – | 91.7% |
| MCP Atlas | – | 67.6% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | – | 86.2% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | – | 52.9% |
| CritPt | 14.3% | 11.6% |
| GDPval (AA) | 56.6% | – |
| CaseLaw v2 | – | 66.0% |
| MedCode | – | 49.8% |
| MedScribe | – | 84.4% |
| MMMU-Pro (Vals) | – | 86.7% |
| MortgageTax | – | 67.1% |
| SAGE | – | 49.3% |
| Vibe Code Bench v1.1 | – | 53.5% |
| DrugDiscoveryBench | – | 29.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | – | 49.0% |
| EBR-bench | – | 23.0% |
| VPCT | – | 84.0% |
| LMCA | – | 43.9% |
| DTBench | – | 90.9% |
Data as of 2026-09-19. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GPT-5.2: questions
- Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash better than GPT-5.2?
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (max) and GPT-5.2 (xhigh) are level on quality (61.9 vs 62.0). The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; GPT-5.2 (xhigh) is ahead overall as of 2026-09-19, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash better than GPT-5.2 for coding?
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher in coding (69 vs 63 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash better than GPT-5.2 for agentic tasks?
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher in agentic tasks (60 vs 56 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or GPT-5.2?
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is cheaper: $0.262 against $4.81 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or GPT-5.2?
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash streams faster: 215 against 67 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash accepts more context: 1M against 400k tokens.