Compare AI models
| Specifications | ||
ParametersThe learned values that shape how a model responds. B means billion and T means trillion. For mixture-of-experts models, the total count is larger than the number active for each token. Parameter count alone does not measure quality. | 671B | — |
Context windowHow much information the model can work with in one request, measured in tokens — pieces of words or other data. This includes your question, attachments, conversation and reply. Limits can vary by model variant and provider. | 128k | 400k |
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins | ||
Input priceWhat you pay for everything you send the model — your question, plus any documents or earlier conversation you include with it. | — | $15.00 |
Output priceWhat you pay for the text the model writes back. It is normally the dearer half: producing an answer costs more than reading one. | — | $120.00 |
Cheapest inputLowest input rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. The cheapest endpoint may run a quantised build or a shorter context — see "Available from" on the model page. | $0.50DeepInfra | $15.00OpenAI |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | $2.15DeepInfra | $120.00OpenAI |
| $208DeepInfra · fp4 | $9,000OpenAI list price | |
| These models have no shared benchmark scores. | ||
BullshitBench v2Nonsense detection — Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | 8% | — |
SWE-Bench VerifiedCoding — Real coding tasks pulled from open-source projects — the AI has to find and fix actual bugs. A human-checked version of the original SWE-Bench. Higher is better. | 57.6% | — |
LiveCodeBenchCompetitive coding — Coding problems published so recently the AI can't have seen them in training — a contamination-free test of raw programming skill. Higher is better. | 73.3% | — |
GPQA DiamondScience — Graduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 81% | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | DeepSeek | OpenAI |
| Release date | May 28 2025 | Aug 7 2025 |
| Access | Open Weight | Closed |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
DeepSeek R1-0528vsClaude Haiku 5.5GPT-5 ProvsClaude Haiku 5.5DeepSeek R1-0528vsGemini 4 ArgonGPT-5 ProvsGemini 4 ArgonDeepSeek R1-0528vsMuse Spark OpenGPT-5 ProvsMuse Spark OpenDeepSeek R1-0528vsGrok 4.7GPT-5 ProvsGrok 4.7DeepSeek R1-0528vsMistral Large 4GPT-5 ProvsMistral Large 4DeepSeek R1-0528vsKimi K3GPT-5 ProvsKimi K3Frequently asked questions
DeepSeek R1-0528 and GPT-5 Pro don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks, so there's no direct head-to-head comparison. Only GPT-5 Pro has a verified first-party API price: $15.00 per million input tokens and $120.00 per million output tokens. No pay-as-you-go API rate is tracked for DeepSeek R1-0528. DeepSeek R1-0528 shipped 71 days before GPT-5 Pro, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Context windows are 128k (DeepSeek R1-0528) vs 400k (GPT-5 Pro). DeepSeek R1-0528 is open weight, while GPT-5 Pro is closed.
Direct benchmark comparisons are unavailable — DeepSeek R1-0528 and GPT-5 Pro don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks.