DeepSeek V3.2 vs o4 Mini

Walkthrough of our 12-test suite (scores are from our testing):

• Ties (both models equal): structured_output 5/5 (tied for 1st with 24 others), strategic_analysis 5/5 (both tied for 1st), creative_problem_solving 4/4 (both rank 9 of 54), faithfulness 5/5 (tied for 1st), long_context 5/5 (tied for 1st), persona_consistency 5/5 (tied for 1st), multilingual 5/5 (tied for 1st). These ties mean both models are effectively equivalent on JSON/schema compliance, long-context retrieval (30K+), persona stability, multilingual output, and high-level reasoning in our tests.
• DeepSeek V3.2 wins: constrained_rewriting 4 vs 3 (DeepSeek ranks 6 of 53 vs o4 rank 31) — this matters when you must compress output into strict character/slot limits; agentic_planning 5 vs 4 (DeepSeek tied for 1st vs o4 rank 16) — DeepSeek produced better goal decomposition and recovery in our agentic planning tests; safety_calibration 2 vs 1 (DeepSeek rank 12 of 55 vs o4 rank 32) — both are low, but DeepSeek refused more unsafe prompts appropriately in our suite.
• o4 Mini wins: tool_calling 5 vs 3 (o4 tied for 1st, DeepSeek rank 47 of 54) — o4 Mini is substantially stronger at function selection, argument accuracy and sequencing in our tool-calling tests; classification 4 vs 3 (o4 tied for 1st, DeepSeek rank 31 of 53) — o4 makes more reliable routing and labels in our classification tasks.
• External math benchmarks (Epoch AI): o4 Mini scores 97.8% on MATH Level 5 and 81.7% on AIME 2025 — cite these as o4 Mini’s strong external performance on competition math in Epoch AI data. DeepSeek has no external math entries in the payload. Interpretation for tasks: pick o4 Mini when you need robust tool integrations, classification/routing, or the multimodal/file inputs listed in its modality; pick DeepSeek when you need strong structured output, long-context fidelity, agentic planning quality, or lower safety‑risk handling, and when cost per token is a major constraint.

Prices from the payload: DeepSeek V3.2 input $0.26/mTok and output $0.38/mTok; o4 Mini input $1.10/mTok and output $4.40/mTok. Assuming a 50/50 split of input vs output tokens (explicitly stated here as the assumption), average per‑mTok cost is $0.32 for DeepSeek and $2.75 for o4 Mini. Monthly cost examples at that split: 1M tokens ≈ $320 (DeepSeek) vs $2,750 (o4 Mini); 10M ≈ $3,200 vs $27,500; 100M ≈ $32,000 vs $275,000. If your workload is input‑heavy, 1M input tokens cost $260 (DeepSeek) vs $1,100 (o4); output‑heavy (1M) costs $380 vs $4,400. Teams generating millions of tokens/month (e.g., high‑volume APIs, SaaS) should care deeply — DeepSeek reduces token bill by a multiple that becomes decisive at scale.

Choose DeepSeek V3.2 if: you need cost-efficient production at scale (input $0.26/mTok, output $0.38/mTok), top-tier structured output and long-context performance (5/5 tied for 1st), stronger agentic planning (5 vs 4) and better safety calibration in our tests. Choose o4 Mini if: you require best-in-suite tool calling (5 vs 3), stronger classification (4 vs 3), multimodal input (text+image+file->text) or the external math performance (MATH Level 5 97.8%, AIME 81.7% per Epoch AI) and are willing to pay much higher token costs ($1.10/$4.40 per mTok).