Model comparison
DeepSeek-V3 vs gpt-oss-20b
DeepSeek-V3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.5 to 32.5 on the Noometry Index. gpt-oss-20b costs 11× less per token, which makes it the better buy when DeepSeek-V3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 31 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeekSummary
- They share 31 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek-V3 scores higher in 6 categories and gpt-oss-20b in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where DeepSeek-V3 leads 57.4 to 35.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 37.8% for DeepSeek-V3 and 65.3% for gpt-oss-20b.
- gpt-oss-20b is cheaper at $0.018 / $0.09 per million input/output tokens, against $0.24 / $0.90 for DeepSeek-V3.
- DeepSeek-V3 accepts more context: 164K tokens versus 131K.
Side by side
| DeepSeek-V3 | gpt-oss-20b | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 39.5 | 32.5 |
| Released | 2024-12-26 | 2025-08-05 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 164K | 131K |
| Max output | 164K | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.24 | $0.018 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.90 | $0.09 |
| Results tracked | 60 | 34 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding DeepSeek-V3 leads
DeepSeek-V3: 42.3 (#106), gpt-oss-20b: 37.6 (#192)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3 | gpt-oss-20b |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 35.8% | 34.4% |
| WeirdML | 36.1% | 40.9% |
| LMArena Coding | 1368 | 1306 |
| Aider Polyglot | 55.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 50% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 70.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 62.2% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 566.05 |
| HumanEval+ | 86.6% | — |
| MBPP+ | 73% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3: —, gpt-oss-20b: 9.3 (#154)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3 | gpt-oss-20b |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 3.4% |
| METR Time Horizons | 49.6% | — |
Reasoning DeepSeek-V3 leads
DeepSeek-V3: 20.5 (#236), gpt-oss-20b: 19.3 (#261)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3 | gpt-oss-20b |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 52.3% | 53.2% |
| CritPt | 0% | 1.4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1365 | 1274 |
| DTBench | 64.8% | 68% |
| LMCA | 15.5% | 14.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.94 | 137.82 |
| SimpleBench | 27.2% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 4% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 65.8% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 60.9% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 87.5% | — |
| ForecastBench | 59.1 | — |
| HellaSwag | 88.9% | — |
| LiveBench | 66.9% | — |
| PIQA | 84.7% | — |
| WinoGrande | 85.2% | — |
Math gpt-oss-20b leads
DeepSeek-V3: 32.1 (#219), gpt-oss-20b: 39.4 (#103)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3 | gpt-oss-20b |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 37.8% | 65.3% |
| Omni-MATH | 40.3% | 56.5% |
| LMArena Math | 1373 | 1317 |
| LiveBench Math | 73.5% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 75.5% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1.7% | — |
Knowledge DeepSeek-V3 leads
DeepSeek-V3: 37.5 (#155), gpt-oss-20b: 34.6 (#195)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3 | gpt-oss-20b |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 67.6% | 60.8% |
| MMLU-Pro | 72.3% | 74% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 53.8% | 59.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1351 | 1258 |
| Confabulations | 26.1% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 6.1% | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 95.3% | — |
| MMLU | 87.2% | — |
| TriviaQA | 82.9% | — |
Multilingual DeepSeek-V3 leads
DeepSeek-V3: 48.5 (#143), gpt-oss-20b: 42.2 (#197)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3 | gpt-oss-20b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1358 | 1268 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1391 | 1314 |
| LMArena German | 1374 | 1255 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1333 | 1244 |
| LMArena Korean | 1319 | 1236 |
| LMArena Russian | 1373 | 1278 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1358 | 1267 |
| LMArena French | 1385 | — |
Instruction Following DeepSeek-V3 leads
DeepSeek-V3: 72.8 (#130), gpt-oss-20b: 61.8 (#240)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3 | gpt-oss-20b |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 83.2% | 73.2% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1345 | 1236 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 81.5% | — |
Long Context gpt-oss-20b leads
DeepSeek-V3: 34.0 (#253), gpt-oss-20b: 37.9 (#209)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3 | gpt-oss-20b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1352 | 1250 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 50% | — |
Writing & Preference DeepSeek-V3 leads
DeepSeek-V3: 57.4 (#130), gpt-oss-20b: 35.5 (#265)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3 | gpt-oss-20b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1375 | 1287 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1364 | 1201 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1472 | 666 |
| WildBench | 83% | 73.7% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1389 | 1268 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 77% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 49.1% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek-V3 better than gpt-oss-20b?
DeepSeek-V3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.5 to 32.5 on the Noometry Index. gpt-oss-20b costs 11× less per token, which makes it the better buy when DeepSeek-V3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-V3 or gpt-oss-20b?
gpt-oss-20b is cheaper. It lists at $0.018 per million input tokens and $0.09 per million output tokens; DeepSeek-V3 lists at $0.24 and $0.90.
Is DeepSeek-V3 or gpt-oss-20b better for coding?
DeepSeek-V3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.3 versus 37.6 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
DeepSeek-V3 does, with 164K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V3 and gpt-oss-20b share?
31 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V3 has 60 scored results on Noometry and gpt-oss-20b has 34.