Model comparison
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus vs GPT-5.2 Codex
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus and GPT-5.2 Codex score almost the same on the Noometry Index (43.1 vs 42.6), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeekSummary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus scores higher in 0 categories and GPT-5.2 Codex in 1 category; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where GPT-5.2 Codex leads 45.5 to 42.0.
- DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus is cheaper at $0.27 / $1 per million input/output tokens, against $1.75 / $14 for GPT-5.2 Codex.
- GPT-5.2 Codex accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 164K.
- DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | GPT-5.2 Codex | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 43.1 | 42.6 |
| Released | 2025-09-22 | 2025-12-18 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 164K | 400K |
| Max output | 147K | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.27 | $1.75 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1 | $14 |
| Results tracked | 16 | 5 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-5.2 Codex leads
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 42.0 (#113), GPT-5.2 Codex: 45.5 (#71)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| ALE-Bench | 745.17 | 1,300 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 72.8% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1339 |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | — | 66.3% |
| SciCode | 40.6% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1426 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: —, GPT-5.2 Codex: 41.0 (#22)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 66.5% |
Reasoning Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 26.4 (#133), GPT-5.2 Codex: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 57.4% | — |
| CritPt | 1.7% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1426 | — |
| DTBench | 81.3% | — |
| LMCA | 28.6% | — |
Math Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 38.5 (#137), GPT-5.2 Codex: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1402 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 52.1 (#92), GPT-5.2 Codex: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1407 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1436 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 74.0 (#106), GPT-5.2 Codex: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1404 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 43.4 (#97), GPT-5.2 Codex: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1421 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus: 61.0 (#92), GPT-5.2 Codex: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1419 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1403 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1411 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus better than GPT-5.2 Codex?
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus and GPT-5.2 Codex score almost the same on the Noometry Index (43.1 vs 42.6), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus or GPT-5.2 Codex?
DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus is cheaper. It lists at $0.27 per million input tokens and $1 per million output tokens; GPT-5.2 Codex lists at $1.75 and $14.
Is DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus or GPT-5.2 Codex better for coding?
GPT-5.2 Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 45.5 versus 42.0 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5.2 Codex does, with 400K tokens against 164K.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus and GPT-5.2 Codex share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. DeepSeek-V3.1-Terminus has 16 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.2 Codex has 5.