Head-to-head · multimodal vs frontier

DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat vs GPT-4.1 Turbo: which model should you choose?

We compared DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat and GPT-4.1 Turbo on price, context window and 12 benchmarks. GPT-4.1 Turbo has the stronger average benchmark score; DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat is cheaper on a blended 3:1 basis.

DeepSeek

DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat

DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat is a multimodal model from DeepSeek. It offers a 1,000,000-token context window, costs $5.80 per million input tokens and $26.43 per million output tokens, and averages 82.5 across the index's benchmark suite.

Input
$5.80 / 1M
Output
$26.43 / 1M
Context
1,000,000
Avg score
82.5
Open weights
Yes
Full DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat page
OpenAI

GPT-4.1 Turbo

GPT-4.1 Turbo is a frontier model from OpenAI. It offers a 1,000,000-token context window, costs $16.12 per million input tokens and $69.91 per million output tokens, and averages 82.9 across the index's benchmark suite.

Input
$16.12 / 1M
Output
$69.91 / 1M
Context
1,000,000
Avg score
82.9
Open weights
No
Full GPT-4.1 Turbo page

Specification comparison

SpecDeepSeek-V3.2 ChatGPT-4.1 TurboEdge
Input price / 1M$5.80$16.12A
Output price / 1M$26.43$69.91A
Context window1,000,0001,000,000Tie
Max output8,192128,000B
Average score82.582.9B
Arena Elo1462.21446.2A
Open weightsYesNoA

Benchmark comparison

DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat wins 5, GPT-4.1 Turbo wins 7, and 0 benchmarks are tied. The table shows the modelled score for each model and the gap.

BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2 ChatGPT-4.1 TurboGapWinner
MMLU-Pro82.584.62.1GPT-4.1 Turbo
GPQA Diamond78.076.11.9DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat
SWE-bench Verified69.674.75.1GPT-4.1 Turbo
HumanEval87.989.81.9GPT-4.1 Turbo
MATH-50090.286.93.3DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat
AIME 202581.077.43.6DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat
LiveCodeBench77.978.70.8GPT-4.1 Turbo
IFEval88.688.20.4DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat
TruthfulQA86.387.00.7GPT-4.1 Turbo
HellaSwag89.290.00.8GPT-4.1 Turbo
MMMU76.078.52.5GPT-4.1 Turbo
Arena Elo1462.21446.216.0DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat

Price analysis

On a blended 3:1 input-to-output basis, DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat costs about $10.96 per million tokens and GPT-4.1 Turbo costs about $29.57. DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat is roughly 63% cheaper than GPT-4.1 Turbo. At high volume, that gap compounds quickly, so price should carry real weight unless the quality difference is decisive.

Both models list a 1,000,000-token context window. That is enough for long documents, large codebases and multi-step agent traces.

Verdict

Across 12 shared benchmarks, DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat wins 5, GPT-4.1 Turbo wins 7, and 0 are tied. On the index average, GPT-4.1 Turbo leads DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat by 0.4 points (82.9 versus 82.5).

The price picture favours DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat. The context picture is effectively a tie. 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 GPT-4.1 Turbo for quality-sensitive work and DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat for high-volume, well-scoped tasks. Run both on a sample of your own traffic before locking in a choice.

Choose DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat if

  • Unit cost matters and you want the cheaper blended price.
  • You need open weights for self-hosting or fine-tuning.

Choose GPT-4.1 Turbo if

  • You want the higher average benchmark score in this index.
  • You need the larger 128,000-token output limit.

FAQ

Is DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat better than GPT-4.1 Turbo?

On the index average, GPT-4.1 Turbo leads DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat by 0.4 points (82.9 versus 82.5). The better choice depends on price, context and your task. DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat wins 5 benchmarks, GPT-4.1 Turbo wins 7.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat or GPT-4.1 Turbo?

DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat is cheaper on a blended 3:1 basis at about $10.96 per million tokens, versus $29.57 for GPT-4.1 Turbo.

Which has the larger context window?

Both models list a 1,000,000-token context window.

Are these models open weights?

DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat is open weights; GPT-4.1 Turbo is proprietary.

Which should I choose for production?

If you need a single default, start with GPT-4.1 Turbo for quality-sensitive work and DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat for high-volume, well-scoped tasks. Run both on a sample of your own traffic before locking in a choice.

Related comparisons