+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Claude Sonnet 4 vs DeepSeek VL2 Tiny
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
DeepSeek VL2 Tiny leads with 15.6% higher average benchmark score. Claude Sonnet 4 is available on 4 providers. Overall, DeepSeek VL2 Tiny is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4 is a multimodal language model developed by Anthropic. It achieves strong performance with an average score of 69.4% across 8 benchmarks. It excels particularly in MMMLU (86.5%), TAU-bench Retail (80.5%), GPQA (75.4%). It supports a 328K token context window for handling large documents. The model is available through 4 API providers. As a multimodal model, it can process and understand text, images, and other input formats seamlessly. Released in 2025, it represents Anthropic's latest advancement in AI technology.
+
+
+
+
DeepSeek
DeepSeek VL2 Tiny is a multimodal language model developed by DeepSeek. It achieves strong performance with an average score of 63.1% across 14 benchmarks. It excels particularly in DocVQA (88.9%), ChartQA (81.0%), OCRBench (80.9%). As a multimodal model, it can process and understand text, images, and other input formats seamlessly. Released in 2024, it represents DeepSeek's latest advancement in AI technology.
5 months newer
DeepSeek VL2 Tiny
DeepSeek
2024-12-13
Claude Sonnet 4
Anthropic
2025-05-22
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 21 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Claude Sonnet 4
Average Score:26.5%
+
+
+
+
DeepSeek VL2 Tiny
Average Score:42.1%(+15.6%)
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Claude Sonnet 4
4 providers
Anthropic
Throughput: 42 tok/s
Latency: 0.4ms
Bedrock
Throughput: 101 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Throughput: 42 tok/s
Latency: 0.4ms
ZeroEval
Throughput: 42 tok/s
Latency: 0.4ms
+
+
+
+
Claude Sonnet 4
Avg Score:26.5%
Providers:4
+
+
+
+
DeepSeek VL2 Tiny
Avg Score:42.1%(+15.6%)
Providers:0