Model comparison
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale vs Grok 4.3
Grok 4.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 39.7 on the Noometry Index. DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeekSummary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale scores higher in 0 categories and Grok 4.3 in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Grok 4.3 leads 58.5 to 46.0.
- DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale is cheaper at $0.58 / $1.68 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $2.50 for Grok 4.3.
- Grok 4.3 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
- DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Grok 4.3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 39.7 | 43.8 |
| Released | 2025-12-01 | 2026-04-17 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 128K | 1M |
| Max output | 128K | 30K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.58 | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.68 | $2.50 |
| Results tracked | 3 | 40 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.3 leads
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: 40.4 (#140), Grok 4.3: 41.6 (#121)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 46.7% | 49.9% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1357 |
| SciCode | — | 47.3% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1415 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 944.17 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —, Grok 4.3: 27.7 (#99)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| GDP.pdf | — | 8% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1165 |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 35.26 |
Reasoning Grok 4.3 leads
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: 32.9 (#73), Grok 4.3: 35.9 (#68)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 52.6% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 55.2% |
| CritPt | — | 8% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 25% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1396 |
| DTBench | — | 90.7% |
| LMCA | — | 38.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 149.16 |
| ForecastBench | — | 60.3 |
Math Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —, Grok 4.3: 46.0 (#74)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 42.8% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 14.6% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 93.3% |
| ProofBench | — | 11% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1388 |
Knowledge Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —, Grok 4.3: 52.5 (#62)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 88.8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 33.2% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1385 |
Multimodal Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —, Grok 4.3: 31.6 (#104)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1229 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 0% |
Multilingual Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —, Grok 4.3: 50.5 (#120)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1385 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1422 |
| LMArena French | — | 1412 |
| LMArena German | — | 1395 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1379 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1356 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1399 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1398 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —, Grok 4.3: 72.1 (#140)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1366 |
Long Context Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: —, Grok 4.3: 42.5 (#123)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1393 |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.3 leads
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale: 46.0 (#222), Grok 4.3: 58.5 (#118)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1397 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1380 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1276 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1075 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1406 |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale better than Grok 4.3?
Grok 4.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 39.7 on the Noometry Index. DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale or Grok 4.3?
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale is cheaper. It lists at $0.58 per million input tokens and $1.68 per million output tokens; Grok 4.3 lists at $1.25 and $2.50.
Is DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale or Grok 4.3 better for coding?
Grok 4.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.6 versus 40.4 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.3 does, with 1M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale and Grok 4.3 share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale has 3 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.3 has 40.