Noometry

Model comparison

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GPT-5.2 Pro

GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.2 to 50.3 on the Noometry Index. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash costs 220× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.2 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash DeepSeek

50.3

Rank #40 Confirmed

GPT-5.2 Pro OpenAI

52.2

Rank #34 Reported

Summary

  • They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher in 0 categories and GPT-5.2 Pro in 2 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where GPT-5.2 Pro leads 64.8 to 48.4.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 89.6% for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and 79.3% for GPT-5.2 Pro.
  • DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $21 / $168 for GPT-5.2 Pro.
  • DeepSeek V4.1 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 400K.
  • DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

DeepSeek V4.1 FlashGPT-5.2 Pro
ProviderDeepSeekOpenAI
Noometry Index50.352.2
Released2026-09-092025-12-11
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1M400K
Max output393K128K
Input $ / M tokens$0.15$21
Output $ / M tokens$0.60$168
Results tracked258

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 52.8 (#29), GPT-5.2 Pro: —

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashGPT-5.2 Pro
LMArena WebDev1620—
SciCode51.9%—
LMArena Coding1511—
ALE-Bench1,092—

Reasoning GPT-5.2 Pro leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 46.2 (#39), GPT-5.2 Pro: 51.8 (#31)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashGPT-5.2 Pro
NYT Connections (extended)89.6%79.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index155.01155.41
ARC-AGI-2—54.2%
SimpleBench—57.4%
ARC-AGI-1—90.5%
CritPt14.3%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1485—
DTBench89.9%—
LMCA47%—
Surface Evolver Bench46.3%—

Math GPT-5.2 Pro leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 48.4 (#52), GPT-5.2 Pro: 64.8 (#23)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashGPT-5.2 Pro
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—74%
FrontierMath Tier 4—46%
ProofBench54%—
LMArena Math1493—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—31.3%

Knowledge Not comparable

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 41.6 (#97), GPT-5.2 Pro: —

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashGPT-5.2 Pro
LMArena Expert1505—

Multilingual Not comparable

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 55.5 (#29), GPT-5.2 Pro: —

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashGPT-5.2 Pro
LMArena Non-English1452—
LMArena Chinese1506—
LMArena French1448—
LMArena Russian1473—
LMArena Spanish1499—

Instruction Following Not comparable

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 77.6 (#24), GPT-5.2 Pro: —

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashGPT-5.2 Pro
LMArena Instruction Following1475—

Long Context Not comparable

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 45.2 (#46), GPT-5.2 Pro: —

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashGPT-5.2 Pro
LMArena Longer Query1476—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 65.8 (#43), GPT-5.2 Pro: —

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashGPT-5.2 Pro
LMArena Text1465—
LMArena Creative Writing1436—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1540—
LMArena Multi-Turn1460—

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash better than GPT-5.2 Pro?

GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.2 to 50.3 on the Noometry Index. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash costs 220× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.2 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or GPT-5.2 Pro?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; GPT-5.2 Pro lists at $21 and $168.

Which has the bigger context window?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 400K.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and GPT-5.2 Pro share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has 25 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.2 Pro has 8.

Related comparisons

Go deeper