Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus vs GPT-5.1

GPT-5.1 leads DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 24.7 to 14.8, and DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus costs 9.9x less per output token ($1.0142 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 41 benchmarks have a result for both.

DeepSeek V3.1 TerminusDeepSeek
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.0142
4
GPT-5.1OpenAI
Coding
40.4
Overall
55.0
Output $/M
$10.00
36
vs boards won of 41 shared, 1 tied

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus or GPT-5.1: which to pick

Only GPT-5.1 has a coding score, 40.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus for output tokens 9.9x cheaper ($1.0142 vs $10.00 per million) and work measured by LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare or Design Arena: UI components, where it leads.

Shared results
41
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus only
4
GPT-5.1 only
60
Like-for-like categories
8 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 Terminus not benchmarked, GPT-5.1 40.4 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 44.7 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus 37.1% against GPT-5.1 81.9%, 44.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus $1.0142 against GPT-5.1 $10.00 per million output tokens, 9.9x apart.
Context window
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus takes 164K tokens, GPT-5.1 400K.

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 V3.1 TerminusBarsGPT-5.1Ties
Coding05
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning04
Math03
Knowledge14
Web design331 tie
General015
All shared boards4361 tie
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index05
Coding benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and GPT-5.1
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusGPT-5.1Leader
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured66.0%Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena WebDevNot measured1396Only GPT-5.1 measured
AA Coding Index43.549.4GPT-5.1
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured86.5%Only GPT-5.1 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured69.8%Only GPT-5.1 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured24.6%Only GPT-5.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)79.8%86.8%GPT-5.1
SciCode38.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)31.8%45.5%GPT-5.1
Terminal-BenchNot measured47.6%Only GPT-5.1 measured
GSO-BenchNot measured13.7%Only GPT-5.1 measured
WeirdMLNot measured60.8%Only GPT-5.1 measured
ALE-Bench745.2Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: coding14251453GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: software and IT14261454GPT-5.1
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1307Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1405Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena WebDev: from an imageNot measured1421Only GPT-5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and GPT-5.1
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusGPT-5.1Leader
AA Intelligence Index14.824.7GPT-5.1
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured149.8Only GPT-5.1 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and GPT-5.1
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusGPT-5.1Leader
AA Agentic Index6.8Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
τ²-Bench Telecom37.1%81.9%GPT-5.1
DeepResearch BenchNot measured42.8%Only GPT-5.1 measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$1,473Only GPT-5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Reasoning benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and GPT-5.1
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusGPT-5.1Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured86.6%Only GPT-5.1 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured83.2%Only GPT-5.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)79.2%87.3%GPT-5.1
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)16.4%28.5%GPT-5.1
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured87.6%Only GPT-5.1 measured
ARC-AGINot measured72.8%Only GPT-5.1 measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured17.6%Only GPT-5.1 measured
SimpleBenchNot measured53.2%Only GPT-5.1 measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured42.0%Only GPT-5.1 measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured19.0%Only GPT-5.1 measured
VPCTNot measured58.7%Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14261457GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1470Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14321462GPT-5.1
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1264Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1272Only GPT-5.1 measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.4%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Math benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and GPT-5.1
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusGPT-5.1Leader
AIMENot measured93.3%Only GPT-5.1 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured93.0%Only GPT-5.1 measured
AA Math Index89.794.0GPT-5.1
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)89.7%94.0%GPT-5.1
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured88.6%Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: math14021446GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1449Only GPT-5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index14
Knowledge benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and GPT-5.1
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusGPT-5.1Leader
MMLU ProNot measured86.4%Only GPT-5.1 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured85.7%Only GPT-5.1 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured73.4%Only GPT-5.1 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured63.8%Only GPT-5.1 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured74.9%Only GPT-5.1 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured61.4%Only GPT-5.1 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured96.4%Only GPT-5.1 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured52.7%Only GPT-5.1 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)85.1%87.0%GPT-5.1
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured48.0%Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: science14511459GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14681456DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
LMArena Text: legal and government14571459GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: business and finance14141431GPT-5.1
FACTS Benchmark SuiteNot measured45.0%Only GPT-5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index33
Web design benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and GPT-5.1
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusGPT-5.1Leader
Design Arena: websites11871187Tie
Design Arena: UI components11821166DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
Design Arena: game dev11311179GPT-5.1
Design Arena: data viz11671204GPT-5.1
Design Arena: 3D11411061DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
Design Arena: all code categories11751171DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
Design Arena: SVG10651149GPT-5.1
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1119Only GPT-5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index015
General benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and GPT-5.1
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusGPT-5.1Leader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured43.2%Only GPT-5.1 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured88.1%Only GPT-5.1 measured
IFBench57.0%72.9%GPT-5.1
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)69.3%80.0%GPT-5.1
DTBench81.3%90.1%GPT-5.1
LMCA28.6%43.9%GPT-5.1
CL-benchNot measured23.7%Only GPT-5.1 measured
CL-bench LifeNot measured17.3%Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text14191443GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: instruction following14041443GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: creative writing14031427GPT-5.1
LMArena VisionNot measured1250Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: English14291451GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: non-English14081431GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1495Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1438Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1453Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1401Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1450Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1433Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: Russian14351435GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: Polish14271440GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: multi-turn14111450GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: longer queries14221448GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: writing and language14091428GPT-5.1
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13911415GPT-5.1
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1252Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1270Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1255Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1263Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: captioningNot measured1252Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1232Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1266Only GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena DocumentNot measured1403Only GPT-5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and GPT-5.1
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusGPT-5.1Leader
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 Terminus$0.0008Fits in one request
GPT-5.1$0.0063Fits in one request

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus$0.018Fits in one request
GPT-5.1$0.092Fits in one request

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus$0.071Exceeds the context window
GPT-5.1$0.350Fits in one request

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus 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 Terminus and GPT-5.1
SpecificationDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusOpenAI GPT-5.1
MakerDeepSeekOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedSeptember 22, 2025November 13, 2025
Context window164K400K
Input $/Mtok$0.3063$1.25
Output $/Mtok$1.0142$10.00
Coding indexNot benchmarked40.4
Independent measurements behind it03
Cost per solved taskNot computable$1.02
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus better than GPT-5.1 for coding?

Only GPT-5.1 has a coding score, 40.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus for output tokens 9.9x cheaper ($1.0142 vs $10.00 per million) and work measured by LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare or Design Arena: UI components, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus or GPT-5.1?

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus costs $0.3063 per million input tokens and $1.0142 per million output tokens; GPT-5.1 costs $1.25 and $10.00. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.1 only.

Which has the bigger context window, DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus or GPT-5.1?

GPT-5.1, with 400K tokens against 164K.

How many benchmarks is the DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus vs GPT-5.1 comparison based on?

41 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and GPT-5.1's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next