DeepSeek-V4-ProvsGemini 3.0 Flash
DeepSeek-V4-Pro | Gemini 3.0 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins | ||
Cheapest inputLowest input rate across third-party providers, excluding the lab itself. The cheapest endpoint may run a quantised build or a shorter context — see "Available from" on the model page. | $0.7078StreamLake | $0.25Google AI Studio |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across third-party providers, excluding the lab itself. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | $1.4157StreamLake | $1.50Google AI Studio |
| Benchmarks | ||
GPQA DiamondScience — Graduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 90.1% | 90.4% |
| BenchmarksPublished by one model only | ||
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. | 14% | — |
SWE-Bench ProAgentic coding — Can the AI fix real bugs in real software? It's handed actual problems from open-source projects and has to write code that genuinely solves them. Higher is better. | — | 49.6% |
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. | — | 78% |
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. | 93.5% | — |
Terminal-Bench 2.1Agentic terminal coding — Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Higher is better. | — | 58% |
MCP AtlasMulti-step tool use — Can the AI chain together many tools and steps to complete one bigger task, rather than doing just a single thing? Higher is better. | — | 62% |
ToolathlonGeneral tool use — Tests how well the AI uses everyday real-world tools and apps to get things done. Higher is better. | — | 49.4% |
BrowseCompWeb browsing — Can the AI browse the web and track down hard-to-find answers? Higher is better. | 83.4% | — |
Humanity's Last Exam · no toolsMultidisciplinary reasoning — Humanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects, written so you can't just look up the answer. “No tools” means the AI answers on its own. Higher is better. | — | 33.7% |
ARC-AGI-2Abstract reasoning — Puzzle-style tests of abstract reasoning and pattern-finding — the kind of thing people find easy but AIs often struggle with. Higher is better. | — | 33.6% |
OSWorld-VerifiedAgentic computer use — Can the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Higher is better. | — | 65.1% |
Finance Agent v2Agentic financial analysis — Tests the AI on real financial-analysis work, like digging through reports and making sound decisions. Higher is better. | — | 42.6% |
GDPval-AAKnowledge work — Measures how well the AI does economically valuable knowledge work, judged against human experts. Shown as a rating (like a chess Elo) — higher is better. | — | 1204 |
CharXiv ReasoningChart reasoning — Can the AI read and reason about complex charts and figures, not just text? Higher is better. | — | 80.3% |
MMMU-ProMultimodal reasoning — A tougher version of MMMU — college-level questions that mix images, diagrams, and text together. Higher is better. | — | 81.2% |
Blueprint-Bench 2Spatial reasoning — Can the AI reason about space and layout — for example, understanding a floor plan or blueprint? Higher is better. | — | 0% |
MRCR v2 (8-needle) · 128k averageLong context — Tests whether the AI can find specific details buried inside a very long document (around 128k tokens — roughly a long book). Higher is better. | — | 67.2% |
MRCR v2 (8-needle) · 1M pointwiseLong context — Tests whether the AI can find specific details buried inside an enormous document (around 1 million tokens — many books). Higher is better. | — | 22.1% |
| Overview | ||
| Company | DeepSeek | |
| Release date | Apr 24 2026 | Dec 17 2025 |
| Access | Open Weight | Proprietary |
Other comparisons
DeepSeek-V4-ProvsClaude Fable 5.1Gemini 3.0 FlashvsClaude Fable 5.1DeepSeek-V4-ProvsGPT-6 AstraGemini 3.0 FlashvsGPT-6 AstraDeepSeek-V4-ProvsMuse Spark 1.3Gemini 3.0 FlashvsMuse Spark 1.3DeepSeek-V4-ProvsGrok 4.6Gemini 3.0 FlashvsGrok 4.6DeepSeek-V4-ProvsMistral Medium 3.5Gemini 3.0 FlashvsMistral Medium 3.5DeepSeek-V4-ProvsKimi K3Gemini 3.0 FlashvsKimi K3
Frequently asked questions
Gemini 3.0 Flash leads DeepSeek-V4-Pro on 1 of the 1 benchmark they both report (GPQA Diamond). Gemini 3.0 Flash shipped 128 days before DeepSeek-V4-Pro, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
DeepSeek-V4-Pro is open weight, while Gemini 3.0 Flash is proprietary.
On GPQA Diamond, Gemini 3.0 Flash leads at 90.4% vs DeepSeek-V4-Pro at 90.1%.