GPT-5.2 wins on coding (85 vs 84) and writing quality and context window (200K vs 128K). DeepSeek R1 wins on price ($0.55 vs $12/1M input). For most workflows, GPT-5.2 is the stronger default — capable but outclassed — gpt-5.4 is now cheaper and better.
The shortest way to see the safest default, the lower-cost option, and the specialist pick before you read deeper.
GPT-5.2 is the safest overall answer here when you want the strongest default instead of the lowest list price.
Switch the scoring lens to see whether the top answer changes when you care more about cost, speed, or long-document work.
OpenAI / Premium / Apr 29, 2026
Capable but outclassed — GPT-5.4 is now cheaper and better.
Ranks models by the broadest mix of coding, writing, research, and long-context usefulness.
You're starting a new project — GPT-5.4 is cheaper and more capable.
The fastest way to see where the recommendation shifts when your priority changes.
Reliable at debugging and multi-file code edits
Strong structured reasoning for product and technical workflows
Solid default for teams that want one premium OpenAI model
Superseded by GPT-5.4 for most use cases
Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads on both coding and writing quality
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.
GPT-5.2 wins on more categories — coding, research, reasoning. DeepSeek R1 is the better pick when math. The right choice depends on your specific use case.
DeepSeek R1 is cheaper at $0.55/1M input and $2.19/1M output. GPT-5.2 costs $12/1M input and $38/1M output.
GPT-5.2 has the larger context window at 200K tokens vs DeepSeek R1's 128K. For large document analysis, GPT-5.2 is the stronger pick.
GPT-5.2 is better for coding with a score of 85 vs DeepSeek R1's 84. For the highest coding quality available, Claude Sonnet 4.6 (79.6% SWE-bench) or Opus 4.6 (80.8%) remain benchmarks.
GPT-5.2 is faster with a balanced speed rating (score: 3) vs DeepSeek R1's deliberate rating (score: 1).
Meta: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is the lower-cost option to start with when you still need useful output at scale.
DeepSeek R1 is the better pick when response speed matters more than maximum reasoning depth.
GPT-5.2 leads on coding with a score of 85 vs 84 for DeepSeek R1.
GPT-5.2 has the larger context window: 200K vs 128K for DeepSeek R1.
DeepSeek R1 is cheaper at $0.55/1M input tokens vs $12/1M for GPT-5.2.
Choose GPT-5.2 for coding and research — serious coding and complex product work.
Choose DeepSeek R1 when math.
DeepSeek R1 is the more cost-efficient option at $0.55/1M — worth considering if token volume is a concern.
