Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

DeepSeek V3.2 vs Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite

Updated October 21, 2026. 9 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

DeepSeek V3.2DeepSeek
Coding
30.0
Overall
21.5
Output $/M
$0.88
6
Gemini 3.1 Flash LiteGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.50
3
vs boards won of 9 shared

Decision reading

Only DeepSeek V3.2 has a coding score, 30.0 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite has the edge where the context window is larger, 1.05M against 164K tokens, and where what matters is IFBench or Long context reasoning (AA-LCR), where it leads.

Shared results
9
DeepSeek V3.2 only
66
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite only
6
Like-for-like categories
5 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 30.0 from 3 benchmarks, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 59.4 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: DeepSeek V3.2 90.6% against Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite 31.3%, 59.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
DeepSeek V3.2 $0.88 against Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite $1.50 per million output tokens, 1.7x apart.
Context window
DeepSeek V3.2 takes 164K tokens, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite 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 V3.2BarsGemini 3.1 Flash LiteTies
Coding10
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning20
General13
All shared boards63
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10
Coding benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemini 3.1 Flash LiteLeader
SWE-bench Verified70.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
SWE-bench Multilingual59.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena WebDev1362Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
AA Coding Index44.2Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)80.7%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)67.6%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)5.1%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)86.2%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
SciCodeNot measured43.4%Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)35.6%24.2%DeepSeek V3.2
Terminal-Bench39.6%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
WeirdMLNot measured52.2%Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured
LMArena Text: coding1453Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1449Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena WebDev: React1350Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1371Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemini 3.1 Flash LiteLeader
AA Intelligence Index21.5Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Epoch Capabilities Index146.1144.3DeepSeek V3.2
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemini 3.1 Flash LiteLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom90.6%31.3%DeepSeek V3.2
APEX-Agents21.3%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
DeepResearch BenchNot measured37.3%Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured
Vending-Bench 2$1,034Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Reasoning benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemini 3.1 Flash LiteLeader
GPQA Diamond80.3%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)84.0%82.2%DeepSeek V3.2
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)24.6%17.2%DeepSeek V3.2
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured81.8%Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured
ARC-AGI57.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
ARC-AGI-24.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1434Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: expert1436Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1446Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemini 3.1 Flash LiteLeader
AIME84.6%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)86.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
AA Math Index92.0Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)92.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured80.0%Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured27.7%Only Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite measured
LMArena Text: math1435Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1440Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemini 3.1 Flash LiteLeader
MMLU Pro84.9%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)76.1%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)55.4%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)51.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)68.2%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)93.9%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)86.2%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: science1446Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1440Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1425Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1410Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemini 3.1 Flash LiteLeader
Design Arena: websites1175Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Design Arena: UI components1149Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Design Arena: game dev1131Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Design Arena: data viz1158Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Design Arena: 3D1133Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1164Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Design Arena: SVG1032Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1082Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13
General benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemini 3.1 Flash LiteLeader
IFBench60.7%77.2%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)73.3%74.3%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
DTBench85.6%76.8%DeepSeek V3.2
LMCA28.8%35.0%Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
CL-bench12.4%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
CL-bench Life7.4%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text1425Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1413Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1400Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: English1439Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1409Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1455Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: German1413Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1374Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1370Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: French1429Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1424Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1424Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: Polish1419Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1427Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1428Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1407Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1395Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.2 and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.2Gemini 3.1 Flash LiteLeader
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$0.0007Fits in one request
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite$0.0010Fits in one request

DeepSeek V3.2 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

DeepSeek V3.2$0.017Fits in one request
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite$0.017Fits in one request

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

DeepSeek V3.2$0.067Exceeds the context window
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite$0.065Fits in one request

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite 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 and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
SpecificationDeepSeek V3.2Google Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
MakerDeepSeekGoogle
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedDecember 1, 2025May 7, 2026
Context window164K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.29$0.25
Output $/Mtok$0.88$1.50
Coding index30.0Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it30
Cost per solved task$0.99Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is DeepSeek V3.2 better than Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite for coding?

Only DeepSeek V3.2 has a coding score, 30.0 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite has the edge where the context window is larger, 1.05M against 164K tokens, and where what matters is IFBench or Long context reasoning (AA-LCR), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V3.2 or Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite?

DeepSeek V3.2 costs $0.29 per million input tokens and $0.88 per million output tokens; Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs $0.25 and $1.50. Cost per solved task is known for DeepSeek V3.2 only.

Which has the bigger context window, DeepSeek V3.2 or Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite, with 1.05M tokens against 164K.

How many benchmarks is the DeepSeek V3.2 vs Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite comparison based on?

9 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. DeepSeek V3.2's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next