DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731vsGPT-5.6 Terra
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 | GPT-5.6 Terra | |
|---|---|---|
| Benchmarks | ||
Nonsense detection BullshitBench v2Given 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. | — | 53% |
Prompt injection robustness Gray Swan IPI · k = 1Attackers hide malicious instructions inside content the AI reads — a web page, an email, a document — and try to hijack what it does. Gray Swan's indirect prompt injection benchmark measures how often such an attack succeeds when the attacker gets a single try. Lower is better. | — | 5.4% |
Prompt injection robustness Gray Swan IPI · k = 10Attackers hide malicious instructions inside content the AI reads — a web page, an email, a document — and try to hijack what it does. This variant gives the attacker 10 tries and counts an attack as successful if any of them works. Lower is better. | — | 26% |
Prompt injection robustness Gray Swan IPI · k = 15Attackers hide malicious instructions inside content the AI reads — a web page, an email, a document — and try to hijack what it does. This variant gives the attacker 15 tries and counts an attack as successful if any of them works. Lower is better. | — | 30.4% |
Agentic coding CursorBench v3.2Cursor's own test of harder, real-world coding tasks inside a code editor, on the refreshed v3.2 task set. Scores aren't comparable with v3.1. Higher is better. | — | 64.9% |
Agentic computer work Frontier-Bench v0.1A hard, ever-evolving set of real computer tasks — coding, system administration, data work, and more — that an AI agent has to complete on its own. Run by the Harbor / Laude Institute team as the successor to Terminal-Bench (v0.1 is the first release of the task set). The score is the share of tasks solved. Higher is better. | — | 20.8% |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 2.1Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Higher is better. | 82.7% | 84.3%Best |
Personal tool use Toolathlon-VerifiedTests how well the AI uses everyday personal tools and apps to get things done — a human-checked version of Toolathlon. Higher is better. | 70.3% | — |
Cybersecurity CyberGymTests the AI on cybersecurity challenges — finding and exploiting software weaknesses inside a safe sandbox. Higher is better. | 76.7% | — |
Business workflows AutomationBenchTests whether the AI can run real multi-step business workflows — the kind of end-to-end office processes companies want to automate — from start to finish. Higher is better. | 25.1% | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | DeepSeek | OpenAI |
| Release date | Jul 31 2026 | Jun 26 2026 |
| Access | Proprietary | Proprietary |
Which is better: DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 or GPT-5.6 Terra?
GPT-5.6 Terra leads DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 on 1 of the 1 benchmark they both report (Terminal-Bench 2.1). GPT-5.6 Terra shipped 35 days before DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Published specifications for these two models are limited — see each model page for the latest details.
On Terminal-Bench 2.1, GPT-5.6 Terra leads at 84.3% vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 at 82.7%.
Frequently asked questions
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 was released by DeepSeek on Jul 31 2026.
GPT-5.6 Terra was released by OpenAI on Jun 26 2026.
GPT-5.6 Terra leads on Terminal-Bench 2.1 — DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 82.7% vs GPT-5.6 Terra 84.3%.
Other comparisons
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731vsClaude Opus 5GPT-5.6 TerravsClaude Opus 5DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731vsGemini 3.6 FlashGPT-5.6 TerravsGemini 3.6 FlashDeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731vsMuse Spark 1.1GPT-5.6 TerravsMuse Spark 1.1DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731vsGrok 4.5GPT-5.6 TerravsGrok 4.5DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731vsMistral Medium 3.5GPT-5.6 TerravsMistral Medium 3.5DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731vsKimi K3GPT-5.6 TerravsKimi K3