DeepSeek V4-Pro wins on coding (93 vs 90) and price ($0.435 vs $1.4/1M input). For most workflows, DeepSeek V4-Pro is the stronger default — best open-weights flagship — near-frontier coding at a tenth of the price.
The shortest way to see the safest default, the lower-cost option, and the specialist pick before you read deeper.
DeepSeek V4-Pro is the safest overall answer here when you want the strongest default instead of the lowest list price.
Mistral: Mistral Nemo is the lower-cost option to start with when you still need useful output at scale.
GLM-5.2 is the better pick when response speed matters more than maximum reasoning depth.
DeepSeek V4-Pro leads on coding with a score of 93 vs 90 for GLM-5.2.
DeepSeek V4-Pro is cheaper at $0.435/1M input tokens vs $1.4/1M for GLM-5.2.
DeepSeek V4-Pro is the stronger default for coding tasks.
Choose DeepSeek V4-Pro for coding and reasoning — frontier-level coding and reasoning on a budget.
Choose GLM-5.2 when budget agentic coding at scale.
Both models serve different primary workflows — consider using each where it has a clear edge.
Switch the scoring lens to see whether the top answer changes when you care more about cost, speed, or long-document work.
DeepSeek / Budget / Aug 6, 2026
Best open-weights flagship — near-frontier coding at a tenth of the price.
Ranks models by the broadest mix of coding, writing, research, and long-context usefulness.
You need vision input, verified agentic performance, or predictable pricing (surge pricing and an announced increase loom).
The fastest way to see where the recommendation shifts when your priority changes.
Best open-weights flagship — near-frontier coding at a tenth of the price.
Top open-weights coder — beats GPT-5.5 at a sixth of the cost.
80.6% SWE-bench Verified (self-reported) — reported as tied with Gemini 3.1 Pro
93.5% LiveCodeBench and Codeforces 3206 — elite competitive-coding results
1M context with 384K max output at $0.87/1M output — an order of magnitude cheaper than closed frontier models
Independent harnesses report much lower agentic scores than the self-reported numbers; trails GPT-5.6 and Opus-class on hard agentic evals
Peak-hour surge pricing doubles rates, a price increase is announced, and it's text-only (no vision)
UseRightAI recommendations are based on practical decision factors people actually feel in day-to-day use.
Newsletter
Useful if you care about ranking shifts, pricing changes, or a better recommendation appearing in this decision path.
No spam. Useful updates only. Affiliate disclosures always clearly labeled.
DeepSeek V4-Pro wins on more categories — coding, reasoning, budget. GLM-5.2 is the better pick when budget agentic coding at scale. The right choice depends on your specific use case.
DeepSeek V4-Pro is cheaper at $0.435/1M input and $0.87/1M output. GLM-5.2 costs $1.4/1M input and $4.4/1M output.
Both DeepSeek V4-Pro and GLM-5.2 have the same 1M context window.
DeepSeek V4-Pro is better for coding with a score of 93 vs GLM-5.2's 90 (out of 100). Claude Fable 5 is the overall coding leader in this directory at 100/100.
Both DeepSeek V4-Pro and GLM-5.2 have similar speed profiles — rated balanced.