Head-to-head · multimodal vs multimodal

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

We compared DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat and GPT-4.1 on price, context window and 12 benchmarks. DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat 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

GPT-4.1 is a multimodal model from OpenAI. It offers a 1,000,000-token context window, costs $15.71 per million input tokens and $64.52 per million output tokens, and averages 82.4 across the index's benchmark suite.

Input
$15.71 / 1M
Output
$64.52 / 1M
Context
1,000,000
Avg score
82.4
Open weights
No
Full GPT-4.1 page

Specification comparison

SpecDeepSeek-V3.2 ChatGPT-4.1Edge
Input price / 1M$5.80$15.71A
Output price / 1M$26.43$64.52A
Context window1,000,0001,000,000Tie
Max output8,19216,384B
Average score82.582.4A
Arena Elo1462.21432.4A
Open weightsYesNoA

Benchmark comparison

DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat wins 6, GPT-4.1 wins 6, and 0 benchmarks are tied. The table shows the modelled score for each model and the gap.

BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2 ChatGPT-4.1GapWinner
MMLU-Pro82.586.23.7GPT-4.1
GPQA Diamond78.076.11.9DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat
SWE-bench Verified69.672.22.6GPT-4.1
HumanEval87.988.30.4GPT-4.1
MATH-50090.286.83.4DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat
AIME 202581.079.91.1DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat
LiveCodeBench77.977.80.1DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat
IFEval88.690.41.8GPT-4.1
TruthfulQA86.381.84.5DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat
HellaSwag89.290.31.1GPT-4.1
MMMU76.076.30.3GPT-4.1
Arena Elo1462.21432.429.8DeepSeek-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 costs about $27.91. DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat is roughly 61% cheaper than GPT-4.1. 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 6, GPT-4.1 wins 6, and 0 are tied. On the index average, DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat leads GPT-4.1 by 0.1 points (82.5 versus 82.4).

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 DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat for quality-sensitive work, and check whether its price holds at your expected volume before committing.

Choose DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat if

  • You want the higher average benchmark score in this index.
  • Unit cost matters and you want the cheaper blended price.
  • You need open weights for self-hosting or fine-tuning.

Choose GPT-4.1 if

  • You need the larger 16,384-token output limit.

FAQ

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

On the index average, DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat leads GPT-4.1 by 0.1 points (82.5 versus 82.4). The better choice depends on price, context and your task. DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat wins 6 benchmarks, GPT-4.1 wins 6.

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

DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat is cheaper on a blended 3:1 basis at about $10.96 per million tokens, versus $27.91 for GPT-4.1.

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 is proprietary.

Which should I choose for production?

If you need a single default, start with DeepSeek-V3.2 Chat for quality-sensitive work, and check whether its price holds at your expected volume before committing.

Related comparisons