DeepSeek V4 Pro vs Qwen3.8 Max
DeepSeek V4 Pro 
Qwen3.8 Max Verdict
- Qwen3.8 Max (max) leads on quality: 64.2 vs 62.8.
- DeepSeek V4 Pro (max) is stronger in agents & tools, instruction following.
- Qwen3.8 Max (max) is stronger in coding, composite, knowledge, maths, reasoning, human preference, multimodal.
- DeepSeek V4 Pro (max) is 1.5× cheaper ($1.98 vs $3.00 per 1M blended).
- DeepSeek V4 Pro (max) streams 2.5× faster (93 vs 37 tokens per second).
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Pro (max) | Qwen3.8 Max (max) |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 62.8 | 64.2 |
| Agents & tools score | 63.7 | 58.2 |
| Coding score | 58.3 | 64.6 |
| Composite score | 70.3 | 70.7 |
| Instruction following score | 74.3 | – |
| Knowledge score | 59.8 | 62.7 |
| Long context score | 65.4 | 65.4 |
| Maths score | 56.3 | 65.1 |
| Reasoning score | 65.2 | 72.2 |
| Human preference score | – | 68.0 |
| Multimodal score | – | 66.2 |
| Blended price $/M | $1.98 | $3.00 |
| Output speed | 93 tok/s | 37 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 48.9 s | 58.9 s |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| GPQA Diamond | 91.7% | – |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | 64.6% | – |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 26.8% | – |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 98.6% | – |
| SWE-bench Verified (Epoch) | 77.6% | – |
| SimpleQA Verified | 52.9% | – |
| Terminal-Bench | – | 27.0% |
| SciCode | 51.0% | 53.2% |
| WeirdML | 66.2% | – |
| APEX-Agents | – | 63.3% |
| ProofBench | 16.0% | 58.0% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | – | 156.4 |
| LMArena Text | – | 1483 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | – | 1504 |
| LMArena Coding | – | 1524 |
| LMArena WebDev | – | 1672 |
| LMArena Vision | – | 1314 |
| LMArena Agent | – | 2.3 |
| LiveBench | – | 78.5% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | – | 88.2% |
| LiveBench Coding | – | 72.9% |
| LiveBench Agentic Coding | – | 64.7% |
| LiveBench Mathematics | – | 91.3% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | – | 78.4% |
| LiveBench Language | – | 79.7% |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | – | 74.1% |
| AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2 | 36 | 45.4 |
| IFBench | 76.5% | – |
| AA-LCR | 80.3% | 80.3% |
| MMMU-Pro | – | 82.8% |
| AA-Omniscience | 0.8 | 12.0 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | 46.2% | – |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 92.8% | 92.8% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 41.0% | 43.1% |
| SciCode (AA) | 51.0% | 53.2% |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | 96.2% | – |
| LiveCodeBench | 87.5% | 87.8% |
| MMLU-Pro | 87.3% | 88.6% |
| IOI | 51.6% | 68.9% |
| LegalBench | 82.4% | 83.6% |
| CorpFin | 65.4% | 65.8% |
| TaxEval | 73.1% | 75.5% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals) | 54.7% | 67.4% |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | 96.4% | 85.6% |
| GPQA Diamond (Vals) | 92.4% | 93.7% |
| Vals Index | 47.6 | 48.3 |
| AIME 2026 | 96.7% | – |
| HMMT February 2026 | 93.9% | – |
| MathArena Apex | 28.1% | – |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 90.0% | – |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 61.3% | – |
| CritPt | 18.0% | 20.0% |
| GDPval-AA v2.1 | 47.5% | 58.6% |
| τ³-Banking (AA) | 39.6% | 51.3% |
| ITBench SRE (AA) | 38.3% | 40.3% |
| Analyst Agent (AA) | 18.8% | 45.0% |
| APEX-Agents (AA) | 24.3% | 42.4% |
| CaseLaw v2 | 59.4% | – |
| Code Migration | 41.5% | 24.0% |
| CyberBench | 72.9% | 28.6% |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark | 52.8% | 60.1% |
| Finance Agent v2 | 50.4% | 50.6% |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark | 7.5% | 10.4% |
| Legal Research Bench | 40.9% | 47.6% |
| MedCode | 42.5% | 40.7% |
| MedScribe | 80.2% | 85.0% |
| MMMU-Pro (Vals) | – | 88.0% |
| MortgageTax | – | 64.0% |
| MysteryMechanism | – | 23.9% |
| ProgramBench | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Public Benefits Bench | 62.9% | 67.1% |
| SAGE | – | 51.3% |
| SkillsBench | 53.8% | 42.0% |
| Tax Agent Bench | 58.7% | 66.0% |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals) | 14.1% | 34.3% |
| Terminal-Bench Science | 0.0% | 1.4% |
| Vals Multimodal Index | – | 65.4% |
| Vibe Code Bench 1-100 | 17.5% | 12.8% |
| Vibe Code Bench v1.1 | 82.3% | 64.7% |
| LMArena Maths | – | 1497 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | – | 1470 |
| LMArena Instruction Following | – | 1474 |
| LMArena Multi-turn | – | 1492 |
| LMArena Longer Queries | – | 1492 |
| Chess Puzzles | 47.0% | – |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 43.0% | – |
| LMCA | 41.2% | – |
| DTBench | 90.7% | – |
| ALE-Bench | 1403.2 | – |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA) | 14.7% | 38.9% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (AA) | 78.7% | 88.8% |
| AutomationBench | 56.7% | 56.2% |
| GDP.pdf | 11.4% | 22.8% |
| MLCR | 17.8% | 20.0% |
| EnterpriseOps-Gym | 49.6% | 47.6% |
| AA-Omniscience: accuracy | 49.1% | 31.9% |
| AA-Omniscience: non-hallucination | 5.9% | 71.2% |
| AA-Briefcase v1.1 | 1257 | 1617 |
| AA Openness Index | 44.4 | – |
Data as of 2026-10-11. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
DeepSeek V4 Pro vs Qwen3.8 Max: questions
- Is DeepSeek V4 Pro better than Qwen3.8 Max?
- Qwen3.8 Max (max) leads on quality: 64.2 vs 62.8. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Qwen3.8 Max (max) is ahead overall as of 2026-10-11, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is DeepSeek V4 Pro better than Qwen3.8 Max for coding?
- Qwen3.8 Max scores higher in coding (65 vs 58 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is DeepSeek V4 Pro better than Qwen3.8 Max for agentic tasks?
- DeepSeek V4 Pro scores higher in agentic tasks (64 vs 58 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4 Pro or Qwen3.8 Max?
- DeepSeek V4 Pro is cheaper: $1.98 against $3.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, DeepSeek V4 Pro or Qwen3.8 Max?
- DeepSeek V4 Pro streams faster: 93 against 37 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Both accept 1M tokens of context.