Model comparison
DeepSeek V4 Flash vs GPT-5.2
Head-to-head evidence from 5 shared benchmark results across 4 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Flash #61 (Estimated); GPT-5.2 #64 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Flash and GPT-5.2 share 5 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 17 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Flash; 23 to GPT-5.2.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 5
- DeepSeek V4 Flash only
- 17
- GPT-5.2 only
- 23
- Comparable categories
- 4 / 8
Pick DeepSeek V4 Flash if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-5.2 only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 5 shared benchmark results across 4 evidence categories; 4 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
DeepSeek V4 Flash has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 58.88 versus 58.43. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
DeepSeek V4 Flash's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 40.8 against 35.2. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 71.2% to 92.4%. GPT-5.2 does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
GPT-5.2 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.75 input / $14.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.14 input / $0.28 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V4 Flash. That is roughly 50.0x on output cost alone. GPT-5.2 is the reasoning model in the pair, while DeepSeek V4 Flash is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. DeepSeek V4 Flash gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 400K for GPT-5.2.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | DeepSeek V4 Flash | Δ | GPT-5.2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | DeepSeek V4 Flash38.8 | Margin→ 53.6 | GPT-5.292.4 |
| Agentic | DeepSeek V4 Flash49.1 | Margin→ 6.6 | GPT-5.255.7 |
| Coding | DeepSeek V4 Flash64.2 | Margin→ 6.4 | GPT-5.270.6 |
| Math | DeepSeek V4 Flash40.8 | Margin← 5.6 | GPT-5.235.2 |
| Reasoning | DeepSeek V4 FlashNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.252.9 |
| Multimodal | DeepSeek V4 FlashNot measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-5.280.4 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 71.2%B 92.4%Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 21.2GPQA: DeepSeek V4 Flash scored 71.2%; GPT-5.2 scored 92.4%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 49.1%B 55.6%Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 6.5SWE-bench Pro: DeepSeek V4 Flash scored 49.1%; GPT-5.2 scored 55.6%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 73.7%B 80%Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 6.3SWE-bench Verified: DeepSeek V4 Flash scored 73.7%; GPT-5.2 scored 80%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Flash | GPT-5.2 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek V4 Flash$0.14 input / $0.28 output | GPT-5.2$1.75 input / $14 output | DeepSeek V4 Flash has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | DeepSeek V4 FlashNot available | GPT-5.273 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek V4 FlashNot available | GPT-5.2130.34 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek V4 Flash1M | GPT-5.2400K | DeepSeek V4 Flash lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticGPT-5.2 wins9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash | GPT-5.2 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 49.1% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 64% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 40.7% | — | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | 57.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | 54.35% | 46.54% | DeepSeek V4 Flash leads |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 65.8% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 47.3% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 84.8% | Not comparable |
| JobBenchSource | — | 34.3% | Not comparable |
CodingGPT-5.2 wins6 benchmarks
Reasoning5 benchmarks
KnowledgeGPT-5.2 wins12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash | GPT-5.2 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 83% | — | Not comparable |
| SimpleQASource | 23.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Chinese-SimpleQASource | 71.5% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | 71.2% | 92.4% | GPT-5.2 leads |
| GPQA-DSource | 71.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 8.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 42.2% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 90.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 35.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | -1.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 43.8% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 79.7% | Not comparable |
MathDeepSeek V4 Flash wins7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash | GPT-5.2 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| HMMT Feb 2026Source | 40.8% | — | Not comparable |
| IMOAnswerBenchSource | 41.9% | — | Not comparable |
| ApexSource | 1.0% | — | Not comparable |
| Apex ShortlistSource | 9.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA AIME 2025Source | — | 99.0% | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source | — | 40.700% | Not comparable |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source | — | 18.800% | Not comparable |
Multimodal5 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash | GPT-5.2 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 75.4% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (5)
Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Flash or GPT-5.2?
DeepSeek V4 Flash is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 58.88 to 58.43. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 71.2% and 92.4%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, DeepSeek V4 Flash or GPT-5.2?
GPT-5.2 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 92.4 versus 38.8. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V4 Flash or GPT-5.2?
GPT-5.2 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 70.6 versus 64.2. Inside this category, SWE-bench Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, DeepSeek V4 Flash or GPT-5.2?
DeepSeek V4 Flash has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 40.8 versus 35.2. GPT-5.2 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Which is better for agentic tasks, DeepSeek V4 Flash or GPT-5.2?
GPT-5.2 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 55.7 versus 49.1. Inside this category, Gert Labs is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.