Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 4 vs DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale

Claude Sonnet 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 39.7 on the Noometry Index. DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale costs 7.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

Claude Sonnet 4 Anthropic

40.8

Rank #145 Confirmed

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale DeepSeek

39.7

Rank #162 Reported

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 4 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 leads 57.1 to 46.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is SimpleBench: 45.5% for Claude Sonnet 4 and 52.6% for DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale.
  • DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale is cheaper at $0.58 / $1.68 per million input/output tokens, against $3 / $15 for Claude Sonnet 4.
  • Claude Sonnet 4 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 128K.
  • DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Sonnet 4 and DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale specifications
Claude Sonnet 4DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
ProviderAnthropicDeepSeek
Noometry Index40.839.7
Released2025-05-222025-12-01
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K128K
Max output64K128K
Input $ / M tokens$3$0.58
Output $ / M tokens$15$1.68
Results tracked583

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Sonnet 4 leads

Claude Sonnet 4: 43.5 (#88), DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: 40.4 (#140)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
WeirdML46.1%46.7%
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)64.9%—
Aider Polyglot61.3%—
SciCode40%—
GSO4.9%—
LMArena Coding1414—
ALE-Bench655.35—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4: 38.5 (#31), DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
TheAgentCompany33.1%—
Cybench35%—
DeepResearch Bench46.6%—
OSWorld43.9%—
METR Time Horizons62%—

Reasoning DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale leads

Claude Sonnet 4: 22.9 (#187), DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: 32.9 (#73)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
SimpleBench45.5%52.6%
ARC-AGI-25.9%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark73%—
ARC-AGI-140%—
CritPt0.3%—
EnigmaEval3.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1372—
DTBench77.1%—
LMCA29%—
Epoch Capabilities Index141.69—
ForecastBench60.2—

Math Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4: 43.3 (#80), DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202571.1%—
Omni-MATH60.2%—
LMArena Math1375—
MATH Level 584.4%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)4.1%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)0%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4: 41.8 (#108), DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
GPQA Diamond79.2%—
Humanity's Last Exam7.8%—
MMLU-Pro84.3%—
Confabulations13.2%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.3%—
GPQA (HELM)70.6%—
LMArena Expert1372—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4: 26.2 (#121), DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
LMArena Vision1191—
GeoBench37%—
VPCT34%—
MindCube44.8%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4: 46.7 (#156), DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
LMArena Non-English1333—
LMArena Chinese1350—
LMArena French1363—
LMArena German1331—
LMArena Japanese1302—
LMArena Korean1291—
LMArena Russian1355—
LMArena Spanish1357—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4: 71.7 (#145), DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
IFEval84%—
LMArena Instruction Following1376—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Sonnet 4: 33.7 (#259), DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
Fiction.LiveBench46.9%—
LMArena Longer Query1398—

Writing & Preference Claude Sonnet 4 leads

Claude Sonnet 4: 57.1 (#132), DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: 46.0 (#222)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
EQ-Bench Creative Writing14831276
LMArena Text1351—
LMArena Creative Writing1345—
Short-Story Creative Writing81.4%—
WildBench83.8%—
LMArena Multi-Turn1376—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Sonnet 4 better than DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale?

Claude Sonnet 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 39.7 on the Noometry Index. DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale costs 7.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4 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 lists at $3 and $15.

Is Claude Sonnet 4 or DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale better for coding?

Claude Sonnet 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.5 versus 40.4 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Sonnet 4 does, with 200K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 4 and DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 4 has 58 scored results on Noometry and DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper