The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale

Claude Sonnet 4.5 and DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale are closely matched at 32.4 and 34.3 on the LLM Stats Score. DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale is 19.0x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · DeepSeek · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 and DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 32.4 and 34.3.

In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale is roughly 19.0x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Claude Sonnet 4.5 also accepts a larger context window (200,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Claude Sonnet 4.5

  • you process long inputs — it offers a 200,000 token context window

Choose DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale

  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
  • cost matters — it's about 19.0x cheaper per token
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Dec 2025
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Sonnet 4.5
Anthropic
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
DeepSeek
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
32.4
#98
34.3
#87
Reasoning
31.5
#100
32.9
#95
Coding
21.7
#81
18.4
#105
Agents
18.3
#62
10.4
#105
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
0 of 1
1 of 1
Input price
$3.00 / M
$0.28 / M
Output price
$15.00 / M
$0.42 / M
Context window
200,000
131,072

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
Claude Sonnet 4.5
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
Math
24.9#110
35.1#43
Tool use
26.2#29
9.8#124
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

9 reported for Claude Sonnet 4.5 · 8 for DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale

1 shared

Claude Sonnet 4.5 outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale is better at 1 benchmark (AIME 2025).

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Mon Sep 07 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale costs less

For input processing, Claude Sonnet 4.5 ($3.00/1M tokens) is 10.7x more expensive than DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale ($0.28/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Sonnet 4.5 ($15.00/1M tokens) is 35.7x more expensive than DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale ($0.42/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Sonnet 4.5 is more expensive than DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Mon Sep 07 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4.5
Input tokens$3.00
Output tokens$15.00
Best providerAnthropic
DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
Input tokens$0.28
Output tokens$0.42
Best providerDeepSeek
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Claude Sonnet 4.5 accepts 200,000 input tokens compared to DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale's 131,072 tokens. DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale can generate longer responses up to 131,072 tokens, while Claude Sonnet 4.5 is limited to 64,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4.5
Input200,000 tokens
Output64,000 tokens
DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
Input131,072 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Mon Sep 07 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Sonnet 4.5 supports multimodal inputs, whereas DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale does not.

Claude Sonnet 4.5 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is licensed under a proprietary license, while DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale uses MIT.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Proprietary

Closed source

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Sonnet 4.5 was released on 2025-09-29, while DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale was released on 2025-12-01.

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale is 2 months newer than Claude Sonnet 4.5.

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Sep 29, 2025

11 months ago

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale

Dec 1, 2025

9 months ago

2mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Claude Sonnet 4.5 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2025-01-31, while DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Claude Sonnet 4.5's training data extends to 2025-01-31, but cannot make a direct comparison without DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale's cutoff date.

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Jan 2025

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale

—

Provider Availability

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is available from Anthropic. DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale is available from DeepSeek.

Claude Sonnet 4.5

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale

deepseek logo
DeepSeek
Input Price:Input: $0.28/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.42/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Sonnet 4.5 and DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Sonnet 4.5
✓ Preferred
DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale.

Which is better, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 and DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at 32.4 and 34.3. Claude Sonnet 4.5 is made by Anthropic and DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale is made by DeepSeek. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude Sonnet 4.5 compare to DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale in benchmarks?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 scores MMMLU: 89.1%, AIME 2025: 87.0%, TAU-bench Retail: 86.2%, GPQA: 83.4%, MMMUval: 77.8%. DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale scores HMMT 2025: 99.2%, AIME 2025: 96.0%, CodeForces: 90.0%, t2-bench: 80.3%, SWE-Bench Verified: 73.1%.

Is Claude Sonnet 4.5 cheaper than DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale?

DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale is 10.7x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Sonnet 4.5 costs $3.00/M input and $15.00/M output via anthropic. DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale costs $0.28/M input and $0.42/M output via deepseek.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Sonnet 4.5 and DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 supports 200K tokens and DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale supports 131K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude Sonnet 4.5 and DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (32.4 vs 34.3), context window (200K vs 131K), input pricing ($3.00 vs $0.28/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Sonnet 4.5 and DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is developed by Anthropic and DeepSeek-V3.2-Speciale is developed by DeepSeek.

Related comparisons