DeepSeek V3.2
VS
DeepSeek V4 Pro
DeepSeek V3.2 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro: which wins at real work?
22 task areas · same graded test runs · rank comparison only, so 0–100 and Elo collections never mix raw scores.
DeepSeek V4 Pro wins 20 of 22 task areas we tested; DeepSeek V3.2 takes 2. DeepSeek V3.2 costs 2.3× less per token ($0.572 vs $1.305 per 1M).
DeepSeek V3.2 costs 2.3× less per token ($0.572 vs $1.305 per 1M).
Task by task
| Task area | DeepSeek V3.2 | DeepSeek V4 Pro | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Content & Brand |
#95
/ 124
Usable
|
#29
/ 124
Strong
|
DeepSeek V4 Pro |
| Coding |
#100
/ 115
Usable
|
#43
/ 115
Strong
|
DeepSeek V4 Pro |
| Translation & Localization |
#89
/ 110
Strong
|
#32
/ 110
Excellent
|
DeepSeek V4 Pro |
| RAG, Safety & Grounding |
#83
/ 113
Excellent
|
#27
/ 113
Excellent
|
DeepSeek V4 Pro |
| Legal & HR |
#90
/ 110
Strong
|
#40
/ 110
Excellent
|
DeepSeek V4 Pro |
| Presentations & Decks |
#81
/ 110
Strong
|
#31
/ 110
Excellent
|
DeepSeek V4 Pro |
| Sales |
#91
/ 110
Usable
|
#44
/ 110
Usable
|
DeepSeek V4 Pro |
| Chef / Home Cooking |
#78
/ 126
Usable
|
#32
/ 126
Usable
|
DeepSeek V4 Pro |
| Structured Output |
#67
/ 113
Strong
|
#23
/ 113
Excellent
|
DeepSeek V4 Pro |
| Executive Assistant |
#76
/ 112
Usable
|
#38
/ 112
Strong
|
DeepSeek V4 Pro |
| Creative & Comedy | #87 / 110 | #50 / 110 | DeepSeek V4 Pro |
| AI Strategy |
#102
/ 126
Usable
|
#68
/ 126
Strong
|
DeepSeek V4 Pro |
| Knowledge & Docs |
#58
/ 110
Usable
|
#25
/ 110
Strong
|
DeepSeek V4 Pro |
| Landing Pages |
#48
/ 72
Usable
|
#16
/ 72
Strong
|
DeepSeek V4 Pro |
| Summarization & Meeting Notes |
#30
/ 110
Excellent
|
#55
/ 110
Excellent
|
DeepSeek V3.2 |
| Customer Support |
#74
/ 113
Usable
|
#52
/ 113
Strong
|
DeepSeek V4 Pro |
| Frontend & Landing Pages |
#25
/ 109
Needs editing
|
#6
/ 109
Usable
|
DeepSeek V4 Pro |
| Investor & Pitch |
#46
/ 66
Usable
|
#33
/ 66
Strong
|
DeepSeek V4 Pro |
| Data & Analytics |
#69
/ 110
Excellent
|
#60
/ 110
Excellent
|
DeepSeek V4 Pro |
| Product & Project Management |
#21
/ 110
Excellent
|
#12
/ 110
Excellent
|
DeepSeek V4 Pro |
| Research & Competitive Analysis |
#53
/ 110
Usable
|
#44
/ 110
Strong
|
DeepSeek V4 Pro |
| Training & Education |
#38
/ 110
Excellent
|
#41
/ 110
Excellent
|
DeepSeek V3.2 |
Rank = position among every model config we tested in that task area (lower is better). Sorted by biggest gap first.
Same task, both models — judged
Both models answered the same test case; an independent judge graded each. Quotes are the judge's actual rationale.
Sales
Insight-led touch to a finance buyer (Follow-up & Break-up)
“The model strictly adhered to length and fact constraints, but failed heavily on commercial judgement by explicitly telling the prospect they were being tracked ('Given you opened our last note'). Additionally, the required insight was too generic to add real value.”
“The response perfectly executes the prompt's constraints, delivering a concise (under 110 words), hype-free, and highly relevant follow-up email. It leverages the provided facts without any fabrication and leads with the exact requested insight. The ask is clear, low-friction, and contextually tied to the insight.”
Frequently asked
Is DeepSeek V3.2 better than DeepSeek V4 Pro?
Across 22 task areas we benchmarked, DeepSeek V4 Pro ranks higher in 20 and DeepSeek V3.2 in 2.
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V3.2 or DeepSeek V4 Pro?
DeepSeek V3.2 costs 2.3× less per token ($0.572 vs $1.305 per 1M).
What is DeepSeek V3.2 better at?
DeepSeek V3.2 out-ranks DeepSeek V4 Pro at Summarization & Meeting Notes, Training & Education.
What is DeepSeek V4 Pro better at?
DeepSeek V4 Pro out-ranks DeepSeek V3.2 at Content & Brand, Coding, Translation & Localization.
More comparisons
This page is Spring Prompt, running in public
We just did this for every model. Do it for your prompt.
The rankings above come from running real tasks through real models and scoring every output. Spring Prompt is that same engine — pointed at your prompt, your test cases, and your definition of good.
- Generate test cases from your prompt — no eval set required to start.
- Compare models side by side with quality, cost and latency in one matrix.
- Optimise the winner until the scores say it's ready to ship.
Prompt × model results
12 test cases · 3 evals