Head-to-head · multimodal vs multimodal

Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision vs DeepSeek-V3.2 Base: which model should you choose?

We compared Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision and DeepSeek-V3.2 Base on price, context window and 12 benchmarks. Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision has the stronger average benchmark score; DeepSeek-V3.2 Base is cheaper on a blended 3:1 basis.

Anthropic

Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision

Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision is a multimodal model from Anthropic. It offers a 400,000-token context window, costs $13.96 per million input tokens and $56.28 per million output tokens, and averages 81.0 across the index's benchmark suite.

Input
$13.96 / 1M
Output
$56.28 / 1M
Context
400,000
Avg score
81.0
Open weights
No
Full Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision page
DeepSeek

DeepSeek-V3.2 Base

DeepSeek-V3.2 Base is a multimodal model from DeepSeek. It offers a 128,000-token context window, costs $5.05 per million input tokens and $27.10 per million output tokens, and averages 80.2 across the index's benchmark suite.

Input
$5.05 / 1M
Output
$27.10 / 1M
Context
128,000
Avg score
80.2
Open weights
Yes
Full DeepSeek-V3.2 Base page

Specification comparison

SpecClaude 3.7 Sonnet VisionDeepSeek-V3.2 BaseEdge
Input price / 1M$13.96$5.05B
Output price / 1M$56.28$27.10B
Context window400,000128,000A
Max output8,192128,000B
Average score81.080.2A
Arena Elo1429.61417.9A
Open weightsNoYesB

Benchmark comparison

Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision wins 8, DeepSeek-V3.2 Base wins 4, and 0 benchmarks are tied. The table shows the modelled score for each model and the gap.

BenchmarkClaude 3.7 Sonnet VisionDeepSeek-V3.2 BaseGapWinner
MMLU-Pro82.584.31.8DeepSeek-V3.2 Base
GPQA Diamond77.377.10.2Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision
SWE-bench Verified72.269.13.1Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision
HumanEval85.482.82.6Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision
MATH-50084.883.71.1Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision
AIME 202580.974.36.6Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision
LiveCodeBench75.773.12.6Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision
IFEval87.986.91.0Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision
TruthfulQA81.683.51.9DeepSeek-V3.2 Base
HellaSwag89.490.20.8DeepSeek-V3.2 Base
MMMU73.876.72.9DeepSeek-V3.2 Base
Arena Elo1429.61417.911.7Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision

Price analysis

On a blended 3:1 input-to-output basis, Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision costs about $24.54 per million tokens and DeepSeek-V3.2 Base costs about $10.56. DeepSeek-V3.2 Base is roughly 57% cheaper than Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision. At high volume, that gap compounds quickly, so price should carry real weight unless the quality difference is decisive.

Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision has the larger context window at 400,000 tokens, compared with 128,000 for DeepSeek-V3.2 Base. That matters for long documents, large codebases and multi-step agent traces.

Verdict

Across 12 shared benchmarks, Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision wins 8, DeepSeek-V3.2 Base wins 4, and 0 are tied. On the index average, Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision leads DeepSeek-V3.2 Base by 0.8 points (81.0 versus 80.2).

The price picture favours DeepSeek-V3.2 Base. The context picture favours Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision. Those two dimensions often matter more than a few benchmark points once a model is good enough for the task.

If you need a single default, start with Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision for quality-sensitive work and DeepSeek-V3.2 Base for high-volume, well-scoped tasks. Run both on a sample of your own traffic before locking in a choice.

Choose Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision if

  • You want the higher average benchmark score in this index.
  • You need the larger 400,000-token context window.

Choose DeepSeek-V3.2 Base if

  • Unit cost matters and you want the cheaper blended price.
  • You need the larger 128,000-token output limit.
  • You need open weights for self-hosting or fine-tuning.

FAQ

Is Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision better than DeepSeek-V3.2 Base?

On the index average, Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision leads DeepSeek-V3.2 Base by 0.8 points (81.0 versus 80.2). The better choice depends on price, context and your task. Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision wins 8 benchmarks, DeepSeek-V3.2 Base wins 4.

Which is cheaper, Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision or DeepSeek-V3.2 Base?

DeepSeek-V3.2 Base is cheaper on a blended 3:1 basis at about $10.56 per million tokens, versus $24.54 for Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision.

Which has the larger context window?

Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision has the larger context window at 400,000 tokens. DeepSeek-V3.2 Base has 128,000 tokens.

Are these models open weights?

Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision is proprietary; DeepSeek-V3.2 Base is open weights.

Which should I choose for production?

If you need a single default, start with Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision for quality-sensitive work and DeepSeek-V3.2 Base for high-volume, well-scoped tasks. Run both on a sample of your own traffic before locking in a choice.

Related comparisons