GPT-5.4 (xhigh) vs. DeepSeek V3.2 (Reasoning)

Comparison between GPT-5.4 (xhigh) and DeepSeek V3.2 (Reasoning) across intelligence, price, speed, context window and more.

For details relating to our methodology, see our Methodology page.

Highlights

Updated

Intelligence

Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index · Higher is better
Not currently available

Speed

Output tokens per second · Higher is better
New

Cost per Task

Weighted average cost (USD) per Intelligence Index task · Lower is better
Not currently available

Model Comparison

Metric
OpenAI logoGPT-5.4 (xhigh)
DeepSeek logoDeepSeek V3.2 (Reasoning)
Analysis
Creator
OpenAI
DeepSeek
Context Window
1050k tokens (~1575 A4 pages of size 12 Arial font)
128k tokens (~192 A4 pages of size 12 Arial font)
GPT-5.4 (xhigh) is larger than DeepSeek V3.2 (Reasoning)
Release Date
March, 2026
December, 2025
GPT-5.4 (xhigh) has a more recent release date than DeepSeek V3.2 (Reasoning)
Image Input Support
Yes
No
GPT-5.4 (xhigh) has image input support while DeepSeek V3.2 (Reasoning) does not
Open Source (Weights)
No
Yes
DeepSeek V3.2 (Reasoning) is open source while GPT-5.4 (xhigh) is proprietary

IntelligenceUpdated

Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index

Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index v4.1 incorporates 9 evaluations: GDPval-AA v2, 𝜏³-Banking, Terminal-Bench v2.1, SciCode, Humanity's Last Exam, GPQA Diamond, CritPt, AA-Omniscience, AA-LCR
Estimate (independent evaluation forthcoming)
Reasoning models are indicated by a lightbulb icon

Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index v4.1 includes: GDPval-AA v2, 𝜏³-Banking, Terminal-Bench v2.1, SciCode, Humanity's Last Exam, GPQA Diamond, CritPt, AA-Omniscience, AA-LCR. See Intelligence Index methodology for further details, including a breakdown of each evaluation and how we run them.

Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index by Open Weights / Proprietary

Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index v4.1 incorporates 9 evaluations: GDPval-AA v2, 𝜏³-Banking, Terminal-Bench v2.1, SciCode, Humanity's Last Exam, GPQA Diamond, CritPt, AA-Omniscience, AA-LCR
Estimate (independent evaluation forthcoming)
Reasoning models are indicated by a lightbulb icon

Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index v4.1 includes: GDPval-AA v2, 𝜏³-Banking, Terminal-Bench v2.1, SciCode, Humanity's Last Exam, GPQA Diamond, CritPt, AA-Omniscience, AA-LCR. See Intelligence Index methodology for further details, including a breakdown of each evaluation and how we run them.

Indicates whether the model weights are available. Models are labelled as 'Commercial Use Restricted' if the weights are available but commercial use is limited (typically requires obtaining a paid license).

Intelligence Evaluations

Intelligence evaluations measured independently by Artificial Analysis · Higher is better
GDPval-AA v2Updated

Agentic real-world work tasks, (Elo-500)/2000

Terminal-Bench v2.1New

Agentic coding & terminal use

𝜏³-BankingNew

Agentic tool use

AA-LCR

Long context reasoning

AA-Omniscience Accuracy

Knowledge

AA-Omniscience Non-Hallucination Rate

1 - hallucination rate

Humanity's Last Exam

Reasoning & knowledge

GPQA Diamond

Scientific reasoning

SciCode

Coding

IFBench

Instruction following

CritPt

Physics reasoning

APEX-Agents-AA

Long-horizon agentic tasks

ITBench-AA

Kubernetes incident root-cause analysis

MMMU-Pro

Visual reasoning

Reasoning models are indicated by a lightbulb icon.

While model intelligence generally translates across use cases, specific evaluations may be more relevant for certain use cases.

Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index v4.1 includes: GDPval-AA v2, 𝜏³-Banking, Terminal-Bench v2.1, SciCode, Humanity's Last Exam, GPQA Diamond, CritPt, AA-Omniscience, AA-LCR. See Intelligence Index methodology for further details, including a breakdown of each evaluation and how we run them.

Openness

Artificial Analysis Openness Index: Score

Openness Index assesses model openness on a 0 to 100 normalized scale (higher is more open)
No data available
Reasoning models are indicated by a lightbulb icon

Intelligence Index Comparisons

Intelligence vs. Cost per Intelligence Index Task

Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index · Weighted average cost (USD) per Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index task
Most attractive quadrant
Reasoning models are indicated by a lightbulb icon.

Weighted average cost per Intelligence Index task. Each evaluation’s cost is calculated from input, cache hit, cache write, reasoning, and answer token prices, divided by task count, and weighted by its Intelligence Index weight.

Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index v4.1 includes: GDPval-AA v2, 𝜏³-Banking, Terminal-Bench v2.1, SciCode, Humanity's Last Exam, GPQA Diamond, CritPt, AA-Omniscience, AA-LCR. See Intelligence Index methodology for further details, including a breakdown of each evaluation and how we run them.

Token UseUpdated

Output Tokens per Intelligence Index Task

Weighted average number of output tokens used to run one task in the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index
Reasoning models are indicated by a lightbulb icon

The number of tokens required per Intelligence Index task. This is calculated by multiplying the output tokens per eval by the relative weights of each benchmark in the Intelligence Index, then dividing by task count (excluding repeats).

Price and CostUpdated

Cost per Intelligence Index Task

Weighted average cost (USD) per Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index task, segmented by token type. Lower is better
Reasoning models are indicated by a lightbulb icon

Weighted average cost per Intelligence Index task. Each evaluation’s cost is calculated from input, cache hit, cache write, reasoning, and answer token prices, divided by task count, and weighted by its Intelligence Index weight.

Cost to Run Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index

Cost (USD) to run all evaluations in the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index
Reasoning models are indicated by a lightbulb icon

The cost to run the evaluations in the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, calculated using the model's input, cache hit, cache write, reasoning, and answer token prices and the number of tokens used across evaluations (excluding repeats).

Pricing: Cache Hit, Input, and Output

Price (USD per M Tokens)
Reasoning models are indicated by a lightbulb icon

Price per token for cached prompts (previously processed), typically offering a significant discount compared to regular input price, represented as USD per million tokens. The values shown here are the cache hit price; cache write and cache storage are billed separately and vary by provider — see "Cache pricing by provider" for detail.

Price per token included in the request/message sent to the API, represented as USD per million Tokens.

The blended cache price shown here uses cache hit price only. Other caching costs differ by provider:

  • Anthropic: charges a separate cache write fee, with different rates for 5-minute and 1-hour TTLs (1-hour TTL is more expensive).
  • Google (Vertex/Gemini): charges a per-hour cache storage fee in addition to cache hit pricing. Some providers also use tiered pricing for prompts above 200K tokens.
  • OpenAI, DeepSeek, others: typically charge only cache hit pricing with no write or storage fee.

See Prompt Caching for the full breakdown.

Price per token generated by the model (received from the API), represented as USD per million Tokens.

Figures represent performance of the model's first-party API (e.g. OpenAI for o1) or the median across providers where a first-party API is not available (e.g. Meta's Llama models).

Context Window

Context Window

Context window: tokens limit · Higher is better
Reasoning models are indicated by a lightbulb icon

Larger context windows are relevant to RAG (Retrieval Augmented Generation) LLM workflows which typically involve reasoning and information retrieval of large amounts of data.

Maximum number of combined input & output tokens. Output tokens commonly have a significantly lower limit (varied by model).

SpeedUpdated

Measured by Output Speed (tokens per second)

Output Speed

Output tokens per second · Higher is better
Reasoning models are indicated by a lightbulb icon

Tokens per second received while the model is generating tokens (ie. after first chunk has been received from the API for models which support streaming).

Figures represent performance of the model's first-party API (e.g. OpenAI for o1) or the median across providers where a first-party API is not available (e.g. Meta's Llama models).

Time per Intelligence Index Task

Weighted average wall clock time (minutes) per task; excludes TTFT and execution time · Lower is better
Reasoning models are indicated by a lightbulb icon

The weighted average time (seconds) per Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index task. This is calculated by dividing output tokens per task by output speed, weighted by the relative weights of each benchmark in the Intelligence Index.

Latency

Measured by Time (seconds) to First Token

Latency: Time To First Answer Token

Seconds to first answer token received · Accounts for reasoning model 'thinking' time
Reasoning models are indicated by a lightbulb icon

Time to first answer token received, in seconds, after API request sent. For reasoning models, this includes the 'thinking' time of the model before providing an answer. For models which do not support streaming, this represents time to receive the completion.

End-to-End Response Time

Seconds to output 500 tokens, calculated based on time to first token, 'thinking' time for reasoning models, and output speed

End-to-End Response Time

Seconds to output 500 tokens, including reasoning model 'thinking' time · Lower is better
Reasoning models are indicated by a lightbulb icon

Seconds to receive a 500 token response. Key components:

  • Input time: Time to receive the first response token
  • Thinking time (only for reasoning models): Time reasoning models spend outputting tokens to reason prior to providing an answer. Amount of tokens based on the average reasoning tokens across a diverse set of 60 prompts (methodology details).
  • Answer time: Time to generate 500 output tokens, based on output speed

Figures represent performance of the model's first-party API (e.g. OpenAI for o1) or the median across providers where a first-party API is not available (e.g. Meta's Llama models).

Model Size (Open Weights Models Only)

Model Size: Total and Active Parameters

Comparison between total model parameters and parameters active during inference
Reasoning models are indicated by a lightbulb icon

The total number of trainable weights and biases in the model, expressed in billions. These parameters are learned during training and determine the model's ability to process and generate responses.

The number of parameters actually executed during each inference forward pass, expressed in billions. For Mixture of Experts (MoE) models, a routing mechanism selects a subset of experts per token, resulting in fewer active than total parameters. Dense models use all parameters, so active equals total.

Frequently Asked Questions

Claude Fable 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Opus 4.8 Fallback) currently leads the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index with a score of 60, out of 43 models evaluated.

The top AI models by Intelligence Index are: 1. Claude Fable 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Opus 4.8 Fallback) (60), 2. Claude Opus 4.8 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort) (56), 3. GPT-5.5 (xhigh) (55), 4. Claude Opus 4.7 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort) (54), 5. GPT-5.5 (high) (53).

Mercury 2 is the fastest at 742.1 tokens per second, followed by LFM2 1.2B (503.9 t/s) and LFM2.5-1.2B-Instruct (486.9 t/s).

Qwen3.5 0.8B (Non-reasoning) is the most affordable at $0.01 per 1M tokens (blended), followed by Qwen3.5 0.8B (Reasoning) ($0.01) and Gemma 3n E4B Instruct ($0.02).

North Mini Code has the lowest time to first token at 0.30s, followed by Command A+ (0.39s) and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite (Non-reasoning) (0.39s).

MiniMax-M3 is the highest-ranked open weights model with an Intelligence Index score of 44. There are 22 open weights models out of 43 total evaluated.

The top open weights AI models by Intelligence Index are: 1. MiniMax-M3 (44), 2. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Reasoning, Max Effort) (44), 3. Kimi K2.6 (43).

Claude Fable 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Opus 4.8 Fallback) leads among 39 reasoning models with an Intelligence Index score of 60. Reasoning models use extended thinking to work through complex problems before providing answers.

Models are compared across multiple dimensions including intelligence (quality), pricing, output speed (tokens per second), latency (time to first token), end-to-end response time, and context window size. Performance metrics are measured directly using standardized prompts across 538 models.

Click on any model name or row in the charts to view its dedicated page with detailed metrics and direct comparisons against similar models. You can also use the model selector to customize which models appear in each chart. View the leaderboard