Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

DeepSeek V3.1 vs GPT-4o-mini

DeepSeek V3.1 leads GPT-4o-mini on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 13.7 to 6.7, and GPT-4o-mini costs 2.5x less per output token ($0.60 vs $1.50 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 4 benchmarks have a result for both.

DeepSeek V3.1DeepSeek
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.50
4
GPT-4o-miniOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.60
0
vs boards won of 4 shared

DeepSeek V3.1 or GPT-4o-mini: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick DeepSeek V3.1 for a larger context window (164K against 128K tokens).

Shared results
4
DeepSeek V3.1 only
7
GPT-4o-mini only
25
Like-for-like categories
3 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
DeepSeek V3.1 not benchmarked, GPT-4o-mini not benchmarked.
Widest category
Reasoning, 24.4 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
DTBench: DeepSeek V3.1 82.7% against GPT-4o-mini 54.4%, 28.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
DeepSeek V3.1 $1.50 against GPT-4o-mini $0.60 per million output tokens, 2.5x apart.
Context window
DeepSeek V3.1 takes 164K tokens, GPT-4o-mini 128K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryDeepSeek V3.1BarsGPT-4o-miniTies
Intelligence10
Reasoning10
General20
All shared boards40
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index4 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 and GPT-4o-mini
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1GPT-4o-miniLeader
AA Coding IndexNot measured11.4Only GPT-4o-mini measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured26.4%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured23.4%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
SciCodeNot measured1.5%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 and GPT-4o-mini
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1GPT-4o-miniLeader
AA Intelligence Index13.76.7DeepSeek V3.1
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured126.5Only GPT-4o-mini measured
Agentic workNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 and GPT-4o-mini
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1GPT-4o-miniLeader
Neither model has a result on 41 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Reasoning benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 and GPT-4o-mini
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1GPT-4o-miniLeader
GPQA DiamondNot measured44.2%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured56.6%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured42.6%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured4.2%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured0.0%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark53.2%28.8%DeepSeek V3.1
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 and GPT-4o-mini
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1GPT-4o-miniLeader
AIMENot measured11.5%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured72.6%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured86.2%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
AA Math IndexNot measured14.7Only GPT-4o-mini measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured14.7%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
GSM8KNot measured91.3%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 and GPT-4o-mini
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1GPT-4o-miniLeader
MMLU ProNot measured62.7%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured45.5%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured60.5%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured54.5%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured72.4%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured64.8%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
MMLUNot measured81.8%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 and GPT-4o-mini
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1GPT-4o-miniLeader
Design Arena: websites1123Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 measured
Design Arena: UI components1085Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 measured
Design Arena: game dev1084Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 measured
Design Arena: data viz1095Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 measured
Design Arena: 3D1077Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1112Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 measured
Design Arena: SVG967Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
General benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 and GPT-4o-mini
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1GPT-4o-miniLeader
IFBenchNot measured31.0%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
DTBench82.7%54.4%DeepSeek V3.1
LMCA24.3%10.4%DeepSeek V3.1
PIQANot measured88.7%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 42 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 and GPT-4o-mini
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1GPT-4o-miniLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

DeepSeek V3.1$0.0013Fits in one request
GPT-4o-mini$0.0004Fits in one request

GPT-4o-mini costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

DeepSeek V3.1$0.032Fits in one request
GPT-4o-mini$0.0093Fits in one request

GPT-4o-mini costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

DeepSeek V3.1$0.125Exceeds the context window
GPT-4o-mini$0.036Exceeds the context window

GPT-4o-mini costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of DeepSeek V3.1 and GPT-4o-mini
SpecificationDeepSeek V3.1OpenAI GPT-4o-mini
MakerDeepSeekOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedAugust 21, 2025July 18, 2024
Context window164K128K
Input $/Mtok$0.55$0.15
Output $/Mtok$1.50$0.60
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is DeepSeek V3.1 better than GPT-4o-mini for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick DeepSeek V3.1 for a larger context window (164K against 128K tokens).

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V3.1 or GPT-4o-mini?

DeepSeek V3.1 costs $0.55 per million input tokens and $1.50 per million output tokens; GPT-4o-mini costs $0.15 and $0.60. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, DeepSeek V3.1 or GPT-4o-mini?

DeepSeek V3.1, with 164K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the DeepSeek V3.1 vs GPT-4o-mini comparison based on?

4 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. DeepSeek V3.1's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and GPT-4o-mini's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next