Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
Wins 3 of 6 areas
Coding · Agents · Long documents
Wins 2 of 6 areas
Reasoning · Following instructions
Claude Sonnet 4.5 wins more areas, narrowly.DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale is cheaper and better at reasoning.
Scores updated · 23 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the six areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- CodingWriting and fixing software20Claude Sonnet 4.52 of 3 tests · 1 tie
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own10Claude Sonnet 4.51 of 1 test
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Claude Sonnet 4.51 of 1 test
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking13DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale3 of 4 tests
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked01DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale1 of 1 test
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up11Even1 each
Agents, long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale costs 96% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.
Where Claude Sonnet 4.5 pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+40.1points ahead
- Fixes real GitHub issues in Python projectsSWE-bench Verified+4.1points ahead
- Reasons across sets of long documentsAA-LCR+2.3points ahead
Where DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale pulls ahead
- Very hard expert questions across many subjectsHumanity's Last Exam+10.9points ahead
- Follows unfamiliar, precisely checkable instructionsIFBench+6.6points ahead
- Research-level physics problemsCritPt+6.3points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 23 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingClaude Sonnet 4.5
- SWE-bench VerifiedClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 4.177.273.1+4.1
- SciCodeClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 1.745.744+1.7
- Terminal-Bench Hardtie35.634.8tie
ReasoningDeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
- Humanity's Last ExamDeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale by 10.917.828.7+10.9
- CritPtDeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale by 6.31.17.4+6.3
- GPQA DiamondDeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale by 3.783.487.1+3.7
- SimpleBenchClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 1.754.352.6+1.7
FactsEven
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 40.150.910.8+40.1
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyDeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale by 4.932.937.8+4.9
Following instructionsDeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
- IFBenchDeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale by 6.657.363.9+6.6
Other results11 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Claude Sonnet 4.5 by 78.178.10+78.1
- HMMT Feb. 2025DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale by 3067.597.5+30
- HMMT 2025DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale by 24.674.699.2+24.6
- AA-OmniscienceClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 17.6-0.1-17.7+17.6
- AA Agentic IndexClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 17.517.50+17.5
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 14.252.137.9+14.2
- HMMT Nov. 2025DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale by 11.681.793.3+11.6
- AIME 2025DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale by 98796+9
- AA IntelligenceClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 6.220.714.5+6.2
- ToolathlonClaude Sonnet 4.5 by 5.84135.2+5.8
- Terminal-Bench 2.0Claude Sonnet 4.5 by 3.65046.4+3.6
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale?
Claude Sonnet 4.5 wins three of the six areas where both have results: coding, agents and long documents. DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale wins reasoning and following instructions, and costs 96% less. They are level on facts.
Which is better for coding?
Claude Sonnet 4.5. It wins 2 of the 3 coding tests both models report; DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale wins none, and 1 is a tie.
Which is cheaper?
Claude Sonnet 4.5 costs $3.00 per million input tokens and $15.00 per million output tokens; DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale costs $0.29 and $0.43. That makes DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale about 96% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 23 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 12 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 11 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.