DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus vs GPT-6.1 Sol
GPT-6.1 Sol leads DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 51.8 to 14.8, and DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus costs 9.9x less per output token ($1.0142 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 32 benchmarks have a result for both.
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus or GPT-6.1 Sol: which to pick
Only GPT-6.1 Sol has a coding score, 82.4 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: science or LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 32
- DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus only
- 13
- GPT-6.1 Sol only
- 66
- Like-for-like categories
- 7 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only GPT-6.1 Sol has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
GPT-6.1 Sol
GPT-6.1 Sol leads, 51.8 against 14.8.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus has a AA Agentic Index result, 6.8.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
GPT-6.1 Sol
GPT-6.1 Sol leads, 1321 against 1187.
Same board, both measured
General
Vals Index
No call
Only GPT-6.1 Sol has a Vals Index result, 63.9%.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
GPT-6.1 Sol
GPT-6.1 Sol takes 1.05M tokens against 164K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus $0.0008, GPT-6.1 Sol $0.0070 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus not benchmarked, GPT-6.1 Sol 82.4 from 5 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Intelligence, 37.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- ALE-Bench: DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus 745.2 against GPT-6.1 Sol 2743.8, 66.6 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus $1.0142 against GPT-6.1 Sol $10.00 per million output tokens, 9.9x apart.
- Context window
- DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus takes 164K tokens, GPT-6.1 Sol 1.05M.
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.
| Category | DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus | Bars | GPT-6.1 Sol | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 4 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 3 | ||
| Math | 0 | 1 | ||
| Knowledge | 2 | 2 | ||
| Web design | 0 | 6 | ||
| General | 0 | 13 | ||
| All shared boards | 2 | 30 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index04
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus | GPT-6.1 Sol | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench coding | Not measured | 96.0% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena WebDev | Not measured | 1753 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| AA Coding Index | 43.5 | Not measured | Only DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured |
| Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 55.0% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 88.9% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | Not measured | 65.1% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| ProgramBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 3.0% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| IOI (Vals AI) | Not measured | 96.9% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI) | Not measured | 43.5% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| CyberBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 39.3% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 79.8% | Not measured | Only DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured |
| SciCode | 38.0% | 55.8% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 31.8% | Not measured | Only DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured |
| FrontierCode | Not measured | 50.2% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| ALE-Bench | 745.2 | 2743.8 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1425 | 1478 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1426 | 1476 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena WebDev: React | Not measured | 1754 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | Not measured | 1800 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena WebDev: from an image | Not measured | 1702 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 9.2% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus | GPT-6.1 Sol | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 14.8 | 51.8 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 168.4 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus | GPT-6.1 Sol | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 6.8 | Not measured | Only DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured |
| Design Arena: agents building web apps | Not measured | 1306 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Design Arena: agents building mobile apps | Not measured | 1213 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Design Arena: spreadsheets | Not measured | 1259 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LiveBench research | Not measured | 83.5% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LiveBench browser | Not measured | 88.0% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LiveBench long agentic | Not measured | 73.0% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| SREBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 50.8% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | Not measured | 52.0% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 21.8% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 38.5% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI) | Not measured | 6.3% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | Not measured | 70.8% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| BioMysteryBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 79.6% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI) | Not measured | 52.9% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Vals Science Index | Not measured | 59.6% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Robo-bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 28.3% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 37.1% | Not measured | Only DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured |
| APEX-Agents | Not measured | 60.0% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| SpireClimb | Not measured | 24.7% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus | GPT-6.1 Sol | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench reasoning | Not measured | 92.6% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| MysteryMechanism (Vals AI) | Not measured | 46.4% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 79.2% | Not measured | Only DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 16.4% | 52.9% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | Not measured | 95.4% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| ARC-AGI | Not measured | 98.5% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| ARC-AGI-2 | Not measured | 94.2% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Chess puzzles | Not measured | 68.0% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | Not measured | 80.0% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| EBR-bench | Not measured | 54.3% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1426 | 1463 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: expert | Not measured | 1489 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1432 | 1465 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Vision: diagrams | Not measured | 1306 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Vision: homework | Not measured | 1356 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 57.4% | Not measured | Only DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus | GPT-6.1 Sol | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | 89.7 | Not measured | Only DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 89.7% | Not measured | Only DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Not measured | 100.0% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | Not measured | 93.7% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| FrontierMath, tier 4 | Not measured | 100.0% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| ProofBench | Not measured | 99.0% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1402 | 1489 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | Not measured | 1513 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index22
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus | GPT-6.1 Sol | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MedCode (Vals AI) | Not measured | 48.8% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 85.1% | Not measured | Only DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured |
| SimpleQA Verified | Not measured | 73.9% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1451 | 1444 | DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1468 | 1433 | DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1457 | 1471 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1414 | 1445 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| FACTS Benchmark Suite | Not measured | 75.3% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here | |||
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus | GPT-6.1 Sol | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1187 | 1321 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1182 | 1317 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1131 | 1389 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1168 | 1281 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| Design Arena: 3D | 1141 | 1460 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1175 | 1345 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| Design Arena: SVG | 1065 | Not measured | Only DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured |
| LiveBench design | Not measured | 82.1% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index013
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus | GPT-6.1 Sol | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vals Index | Not measured | 63.9% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LiveBench data analysis | Not measured | 82.7% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 59.3% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| SAGE (Vals AI) | Not measured | 46.5% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | Not measured | 86.5% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| IFBench | 57.0% | Not measured | Only DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 69.3% | 84.0% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| DTBench | 81.3% | 96.5% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMCA | 28.6% | 62.8% | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| Furniture assembly | Not measured | 80.0% | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Text | 1419 | 1443 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1404 | 1466 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1403 | 1425 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Vision | Not measured | 1288 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1429 | 1450 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1408 | 1433 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | Not measured | 1487 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Text: French | Not measured | 1460 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | Not measured | 1439 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1435 | 1457 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: Polish | 1427 | Not measured | Only DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1411 | 1442 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1422 | 1458 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1409 | 1444 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1391 | 1426 | GPT-6.1 Sol |
| LMArena Vision: English | Not measured | 1274 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Vision: reading text | Not measured | 1289 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| LMArena Vision: creative writing | Not measured | 1301 | Only GPT-6.1 Sol measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus | GPT-6.1 Sol | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
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.
| Specification | DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus | OpenAI GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | DeepSeek | OpenAI |
| Weights | Open weights | No public weights listed |
| Released | September 22, 2025 | September 29, 2026 |
| Context window | 164K | 1.05M |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.3063 | $2.00 |
| Output $/Mtok | $1.0142 | $10.00 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 82.4 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 5 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus better than GPT-6.1 Sol for coding?
Only GPT-6.1 Sol has a coding score, 82.4 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: science or LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus or GPT-6.1 Sol?
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus costs $0.3063 per million input tokens and $1.0142 per million output tokens; GPT-6.1 Sol costs $2.00 and $10.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus or GPT-6.1 Sol?
GPT-6.1 Sol, with 1.05M tokens against 164K.
How many benchmarks is the DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus vs GPT-6.1 Sol comparison based on?
32 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and GPT-6.1 Sol's on 5. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.