Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.0 to 39.1 on the Noometry Index. DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale costs 7.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

Claude Sonnet 4.5 Anthropic

44.0

Rank #76 Confirmed

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale DeepSeek

39.1

Rank #159 Reported

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 4.5 scores higher in 2 categories and DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale in 1 category; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads 66.7 to 46.1.
  • DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale is cheaper at $0.58 / $1.68 per million input/output tokens, against $3 / $15 for Claude Sonnet 4.5.
  • Claude Sonnet 4.5 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
  • DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Sonnet 4.5DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
ProviderAnthropicDeepSeek
Noometry Index44.039.1
Released2025-09-292025-12-01
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M128K
Max output64K128K
Input $ / M tokens$3$0.58
Output $ / M tokens$15$1.68
Results tracked733

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 47.8 (#54), DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: 39.9 (#136)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
WeirdML47.7%46.7%
SWE-bench Verified71.3%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)71.4%—
LMArena WebDev1393—
SWE-bench Multilingual67%—
SciCode44.7%—
GSO14.7%—
LMArena Coding1489—
ALE-Bench796.15—
AlgoTune1.52—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 38.1 (#30), DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
Terminal-Bench46.5%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard73.2%—
GDPval42.5%—
Remote Labor Index2.1%—
τ²-bench Airline72%—
τ²-bench Banking25.3%—
τ²-bench Retail72.4%—
τ²-bench Telecom84.9%—
Cybench60%—
DeepResearch Bench52.6%—
OSWorld62.9%—
LMArena Search1159—
METR Time Horizons67.4%—
Vending-Bench 23,839—

Reasoning DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 26.9 (#113), DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: 32.1 (#65)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
SimpleBench54.3%52.6%
ARC-AGI-213.6%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.9%—
NYT Connections (extended)37.3%—
ARC-AGI-163.7%—
CritPt1.1%—
Chess Puzzles12%—
EnigmaEval6%—
EBR-Bench2.4%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1462—
Mystery Game Puzzles17%—
DTBench83.2%—
LMCA38.8%—
Epoch Capabilities Index146.84—
ForecastBench61.9—

Math Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 31.9 (#190), DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)23.9%—
FrontierMath Tier 42.4%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202577.8%—
ProofBench19%—
Omni-MATH55.3%—
LMArena Math1448—
MATH Level 597.7%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)15.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 48.4 (#70), DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
GPQA Diamond82.3%—
Humanity's Last Exam13.7%—
SimpleQA Verified30.7%—
MMLU-Pro86.9%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%—
GPQA (HELM)68.6%—
LMArena Expert1483—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 34.1 (#84), DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
VPCT39.8%—
LMArena Document1450—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 53.6 (#65), DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
LMArena Non-English1425—
LMArena Chinese1459—
LMArena French1459—
LMArena German1427—
LMArena Japanese1390—
LMArena Korean1403—
LMArena Russian1436—
LMArena Spanish1457—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 75.2 (#74), DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
IFEval85%—
LMArena Instruction Following1459—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 45.2 (#45), DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
LMArena Longer Query1476—

Writing & Preference Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 66.7 (#33), DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: 46.1 (#217)

BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.5DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
EQ-Bench Creative Writing16781276
LMArena Text1439—
LMArena Creative Writing1442—
WildBench85.4%—
LMArena Multi-Turn1465—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Sonnet 4.5 better than DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.0 to 39.1 on the Noometry Index. DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale costs 7.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale?

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale is cheaper. It lists at $0.58 per million input tokens and $1.68 per million output tokens; Claude Sonnet 4.5 lists at $3 and $15.

Is Claude Sonnet 4.5 or DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale better for coding?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.8 versus 39.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 4.5 and DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 4.5 has 73 scored results on Noometry and DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper