LLMBenchmark.ai

Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

DeepSeek V3.2 Exp vs Beam 1.0 501B A23B

Updated October 21, 2026. 27 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

DeepSeek V3.2 ExpDeepSeek
Coding
55.0
Overall
16.6
Output $/M
$0.41
8
R Beam 1.0 501B A23BReflection
Coding
33.8
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.00
19
vs boards won of 27 shared

Decision reading

Pick DeepSeek V3.2 Exp for coding: it scores 55.0 on the Vibe Coding Index against 33.8 for Beam 1.0 501B A23B.

Pick Beam 1.0 501B A23B when the context window is larger, 1.05M against 164K tokens, or when what matters is LMArena WebDev or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.

Shared results
27
DeepSeek V3.2 Exp only
30
Beam 1.0 501B A23B only
1
Like-for-like categories
6 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

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 V3.2 Exp 55.0 from 2 benchmarks, Beam 1.0 501B A23B 33.8 from 1 benchmark.
Widest category
Coding, 14.7 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena WebDev: HTML: DeepSeek V3.2 Exp 1281 against Beam 1.0 501B A23B 1436, 25.9 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
DeepSeek V3.2 Exp $0.41 against Beam 1.0 501B A23B $1.00 per million output tokens, 2.4x apart.
Context window
DeepSeek V3.2 Exp takes 164K tokens, Beam 1.0 501B A23B 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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryDeepSeek V3.2 ExpBarsBeam 1.0 501B A23BTies
Coding04
Reasoning03
Math02
Knowledge22
Web design02
General66
All shared boards819
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index04
Coding benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 Exp and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2 ExpBeam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
Aider polyglot74.2%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
LMArena WebDev12721437Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)78.9%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)31.1%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
WeirdML39.5%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
LMArena Text: coding14381473Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: software and IT14381461Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1443Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML12811436Beam 1.0 501B A23B
Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 Exp and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2 ExpBeam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
AA Intelligence Index16.6Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
Epoch Capabilities Index144.9Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 Exp and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2 ExpBeam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom33.9%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
TheAgentCompany42.9%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Reasoning benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 Exp and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2 ExpBeam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)79.7%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)14.9%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14291442Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: expert14221447Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14441451Beam 1.0 501B A23B
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 Exp and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2 ExpBeam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
AA Math Index87.7Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)87.7%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
LMArena Text: math14221459Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: mathematical work14331475Beam 1.0 501B A23B
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index22
Knowledge benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 Exp and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2 ExpBeam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)85.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
LMArena Text: science14431430DeepSeek V3.2 Exp
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14681376DeepSeek V3.2 Exp
LMArena Text: legal and government14191433Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: business and finance14121430Beam 1.0 501B A23B
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Web design benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 Exp and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2 ExpBeam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
Design Arena: websites11791253Beam 1.0 501B A23B
Design Arena: UI components1166Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
Design Arena: game dev11451222Beam 1.0 501B A23B
Design Arena: data viz1152Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
Design Arena: 3D1148Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
Design Arena: all code categories1171Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
Design Arena: SVG1031Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index66
General benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 Exp and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2 ExpBeam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
IFBench54.1%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)72.3%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
DTBench87.7%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
LMCA29.1%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
Fiction.LiveBench83.3%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
CL-bench13.2%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
CL-bench Life9.5%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
LMArena Text14251425Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: instruction following14011430Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: creative writing14041390DeepSeek V3.2 Exp
LMArena Text: English14411436DeepSeek V3.2 Exp
LMArena Text: non-English14041413Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: Chinese14611424DeepSeek V3.2 Exp
LMArena Text: German1440Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1331Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
LMArena Text: Korean1372Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
LMArena Text: French14341461Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: Spanish1441Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
LMArena Text: Russian14121412Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: Polish1435Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 Exp measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn14221414DeepSeek V3.2 Exp
LMArena Text: longer queries14181429Beam 1.0 501B A23B
LMArena Text: writing and language14071400DeepSeek V3.2 Exp
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14071399DeepSeek V3.2 Exp
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 Exp and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2 ExpBeam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
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 V3.2 Exp$0.0005Fits in one request
Beam 1.0 501B A23B$0.0008Fits in one request

DeepSeek V3.2 Exp costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

DeepSeek V3.2 Exp$0.015Fits in one request
Beam 1.0 501B A23B$0.018Fits in one request

DeepSeek V3.2 Exp costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

DeepSeek V3.2 Exp$0.058Exceeds the context window
Beam 1.0 501B A23B$0.070Fits in one request

DeepSeek V3.2 Exp 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 V3.2 Exp and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
SpecificationDeepSeek V3.2 ExpReflection Beam 1.0 501B A23B
MakerDeepSeekReflection
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 29, 2025October 16, 2026
Context window164K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.27$0.30
Output $/Mtok$0.41$1.00
Coding index55.033.8
Independent measurements behind it21
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is DeepSeek V3.2 Exp better than Beam 1.0 501B A23B for coding?

Pick DeepSeek V3.2 Exp for coding: it scores 55.0 on the Vibe Coding Index against 33.8 for Beam 1.0 501B A23B. Pick Beam 1.0 501B A23B when the context window is larger, 1.05M against 164K tokens, or when what matters is LMArena WebDev or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V3.2 Exp or Beam 1.0 501B A23B?

DeepSeek V3.2 Exp costs $0.27 per million input tokens and $0.41 per million output tokens; Beam 1.0 501B A23B costs $0.30 and $1.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, DeepSeek V3.2 Exp or Beam 1.0 501B A23B?

Beam 1.0 501B A23B, with 1.05M tokens against 164K.

How many benchmarks is the DeepSeek V3.2 Exp vs Beam 1.0 501B A23B comparison based on?

27 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. DeepSeek V3.2 Exp's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Beam 1.0 501B A23B's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next