Model Comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking)

Claude Sonnet 4.6 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking) is 19.0x cheaper per token.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

5 benchmarks

Claude Sonnet 4.6 outperforms in 5 benchmarks (BrowseComp, GPQA, Humanity's Last Exam, SWE-Bench Verified, Terminal-Bench 2.0), while DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking) is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Sonnet 4.6 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Thu Apr 16 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking) costs less

For input processing, Claude Sonnet 4.6 ($3.00/1M tokens) is 10.7x more expensive than DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking) ($0.28/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Sonnet 4.6 ($15.00/1M tokens) is 35.7x more expensive than DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking) ($0.42/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Sonnet 4.6 is more expensive than DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking).*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Thu Apr 16 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4.6
Input tokens$3.00
Output tokens$15.00
Best providerAnthropic
DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking)
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 4.6 accepts 200,000 input tokens compared to DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking)'s 131,072 tokens. DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking) can generate longer responses up to 65,536 tokens, while Claude Sonnet 4.6 is limited to 64,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4.6
Input200,000 tokens
Output64,000 tokens
DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking)
Input131,072 tokens
Output65,536 tokens
Thu Apr 16 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Claude Sonnet 4.6 supports multimodal inputs, whereas DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking) does not.

Claude Sonnet 4.6 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Text
Images
Audio
Video

DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking)

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Sonnet 4.6 is licensed under a proprietary license, while DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking) uses MIT.

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

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Proprietary

Closed source

DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking)

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Sonnet 4.6 was released on 2026-02-17, while DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking) was released on 2025-12-01.

Claude Sonnet 4.6 is 3 months newer than DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking).

Claude Sonnet 4.6

Feb 17, 2026

1 months ago

2mo newer
DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking)

Dec 1, 2025

4 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

Claude Sonnet 4.6 is available from Anthropic. DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking) is available from DeepSeek.

Claude Sonnet 4.6

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

DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking)

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→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Larger context window (200,000 tokens)
Supports multimodal inputs
Higher BrowseComp score (74.7% vs 51.4%)
Higher GPQA score (89.9% vs 82.4%)
Higher Humanity's Last Exam score (49.0% vs 25.1%)
Higher SWE-Bench Verified score (79.6% vs 73.1%)
Higher Terminal-Bench 2.0 score (59.1% vs 46.4%)
DeepSeek
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Has open weights

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4.6
DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking)

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking)

Claude Sonnet 4.6 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is made by Anthropic and DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking) is made by DeepSeek. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores Tau2 Telecom: 97.9%, Tau2 Retail: 91.7%, GPQA: 89.9%, MMMLU: 89.3%, SWE-Bench Verified: 79.6%. DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking) scores AIME 2025: 93.1%, HMMT 2025: 90.2%, MMLU-Pro: 85.0%, LiveCodeBench: 83.3%, GPQA: 82.4%.
DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking) is 10.7x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Sonnet 4.6 costs $3.00/M input and $15.00/M output via anthropic. DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking) costs $0.28/M input and $0.42/M output via deepseek.
Claude Sonnet 4.6 supports 200K tokens and DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking) supports 131K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include 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.
Claude Sonnet 4.6 is developed by Anthropic and DeepSeek-V3.2 (Thinking) is developed by DeepSeek.