Model comparison
DeepSeek V4 Pro vs Gemini 2.0 Pro
DeepSeek V4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.3 to 39.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeek
GoogleSummary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek V4 Pro scores higher in 7 categories and Gemini 2.0 Pro in 0 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where DeepSeek V4 Pro leads 56.5 to 22.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is GPQA Diamond: 91.7% for DeepSeek V4 Pro and 65.7% for Gemini 2.0 Pro.
- DeepSeek V4 Pro has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemini 2.0 Pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | |
| Noometry Index | 54.3 | 39.1 |
| Released | 2026-04-24 | 2025-02-05 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | — |
| Max output | 393K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.66 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.98 | — |
| Results tracked | 48 | 14 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding DeepSeek V4 Pro leads
DeepSeek V4 Pro: 52.4 (#34), Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.8 (#187)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemini 2.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 77.6% | — |
| FrontierCode | 28.6% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 35.6% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1582 | — |
| SciCode | 51% | — |
| WeirdML | 66.2% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 63.5% |
| LMArena Coding | 1470 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,403 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
DeepSeek V4 Pro: 32.8 (#58), Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemini 2.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 47.3% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 3,285 | — |
Reasoning DeepSeek V4 Pro leads
DeepSeek V4 Pro: 56.5 (#24), Gemini 2.0 Pro: 22.3 (#198)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemini 2.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155.31 | 135.06 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 61.3% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 53.5% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 91.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 90.5% | — |
| CritPt | 18% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 47% | — |
| EnigmaEval | — | 0.7% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 60.1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1461 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 43% | — |
| DTBench | 93.9% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 68% |
| LMCA | 45.5% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 40% | — |
| ForecastBench | 56.1 | — |
| LiveBench | — | 65.1% |
Math DeepSeek V4 Pro leads
DeepSeek V4 Pro: 64.8 (#30), Gemini 2.0 Pro: 39.7 (#100)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemini 2.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 64.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 26.8% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 76.6% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.6% | — |
| ProofBench | 50% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 71% |
| LMArena Math | 1455 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 83.5% |
Knowledge DeepSeek V4 Pro leads
DeepSeek V4 Pro: 59.5 (#31), Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#167)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemini 2.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 91.7% | 65.7% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 52.9% | — |
| Confabulations | — | 18.4% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 8.6% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1464 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
DeepSeek V4 Pro: 54.4 (#45), Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemini 2.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1439 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1486 | — |
| LMArena French | 1472 | — |
| LMArena German | 1458 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1445 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1447 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1453 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1458 | — |
Instruction Following Too close to call
DeepSeek V4 Pro: 76.1 (#47), Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.5 (#59)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemini 2.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 83.4% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1448 | — |
Long Context DeepSeek V4 Pro leads
DeepSeek V4 Pro: 45.0 (#51), Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.2 (#292)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemini 2.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 41.7% |
| CL-bench Life | 13.5% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1458 | — |
Writing & Preference DeepSeek V4 Pro leads
DeepSeek V4 Pro: 65.5 (#46), Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#165)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Gemini 2.0 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1451 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1446 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1553 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1166 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1467 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 44.9% |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek V4 Pro better than Gemini 2.0 Pro?
DeepSeek V4 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.3 to 39.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is DeepSeek V4 Pro or Gemini 2.0 Pro better for coding?
DeepSeek V4 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.4 versus 37.8 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek V4 Pro and Gemini 2.0 Pro share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek V4 Pro has 48 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14.