Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

DeepSeek V3.1 vs GPT-5 Image Mini

DeepSeek V3.1 costs 1.3x less per output token than GPT-5 Image Mini ($1.50 vs $2.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

DeepSeek V3.1DeepSeek
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.50
GPT-5 Image MiniOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$2.00
vs $1.50 vs $2.00 per 1M output tokens. DeepSeek V3.1 is 1.3x cheaper.

DeepSeek V3.1 or GPT-5 Image Mini: which to pick

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

Pick DeepSeek V3.1 for output tokens 1.3x cheaper ($1.50 vs $2.00 per million).

No benchmark has tested both yet. DeepSeek V3.1 has results on AA Intelligence Index, Kagi LLM Benchmark and Design Arena: websites; GPT-5 Image Mini on Design Arena: images, Design Arena: graphic design and Design Arena: logos. Compare them on price and context instead.

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-5 Image Mini not benchmarked.
Widest category
None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
Widest single gap
None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
Output price
DeepSeek V3.1 $1.50 against GPT-5 Image Mini $2.00 per million output tokens, 1.3x apart.
Context window
DeepSeek V3.1 takes 164K tokens, GPT-5 Image Mini 400K.

Benchmark by benchmark

Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.

IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Intelligence benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 and GPT-5 Image Mini
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1GPT-5 Image MiniLeader
AA Intelligence Index13.7Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Reasoning benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 and GPT-5 Image Mini
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1GPT-5 Image MiniLeader
Kagi LLM Benchmark53.2%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards measured
Web design benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 and GPT-5 Image Mini
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1GPT-5 Image 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
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
General benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 and GPT-5 Image Mini
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1GPT-5 Image MiniLeader
DTBench82.7%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 measured
LMCA24.3%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 44 boards here
Image generationDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards measured
Image generation benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 and GPT-5 Image Mini
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1GPT-5 Image MiniLeader
Design Arena: imagesNot measured1184Only GPT-5 Image Mini measured
Design Arena: graphic designNot measured1165Only GPT-5 Image Mini measured
Design Arena: logosNot measured1209Only GPT-5 Image Mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 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-5 Image Mini$0.0035Fits in one request

DeepSeek V3.1 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

DeepSeek V3.1$0.032Fits in one request
GPT-5 Image Mini$0.131Fits in one request

DeepSeek V3.1 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

DeepSeek V3.1$0.125Exceeds the context window
GPT-5 Image Mini$0.520Fits in one request

DeepSeek V3.1 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-5 Image Mini
SpecificationDeepSeek V3.1OpenAI GPT-5 Image Mini
MakerDeepSeekOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedAugust 21, 2025October 16, 2025
Context window164K400K
Input $/Mtok$0.55$2.50
Output $/Mtok$1.50$2.00
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-5 Image Mini for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick DeepSeek V3.1 for output tokens 1.3x cheaper ($1.50 vs $2.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V3.1 or GPT-5 Image Mini?

DeepSeek V3.1 costs $0.55 per million input tokens and $1.50 per million output tokens; GPT-5 Image Mini costs $2.50 and $2.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, DeepSeek V3.1 or GPT-5 Image Mini?

GPT-5 Image Mini, with 400K tokens against 164K.

Has any benchmark tested both DeepSeek V3.1 and GPT-5 Image Mini?

No benchmark has tested both yet. DeepSeek V3.1 has results on AA Intelligence Index, Kagi LLM Benchmark and Design Arena: websites; GPT-5 Image Mini on Design Arena: images, Design Arena: graphic design and Design Arena: logos. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 21, 2026.

Compare next