Choose DeepSeek V4 Pro when
- You want to test this catalog row directly.
- You need the exact public slug and pricing fields.
- You can validate fit with a small request.
deepseek-v4-pro
Use this when you are testing DeepSeek V4 Pro as an alternative to the highest listed GPT row for coding, analysis, or general API workloads.
Independent service. Not affiliated with OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, or Z.AI.
DeepSeek V4 Pro is a public CorvusLLM catalog row. GPT 5.5 is a premium GPT row for strong OpenAI-compatible chat, coding, and reasoning workflows. Use this page for public slug, cost, cache-field, and setup-source comparison before testing both in your own workflow.
Pricing references were checked on 2026-05-11 and 2026-04-29. Official rates are source-linked comparison references, not invoices from the provider.
| Field | DeepSeek V4 Pro | GPT 5.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Public slug | deepseek-v4-pro | gpt-5.5 |
| Provider family | DeepSeek (DeepSeek) | GPT (OpenAI) |
| CorvusLLM input | $0.609/1M | $1.75/1M |
| CorvusLLM output | $1.218/1M | $10.50/1M |
| CorvusLLM cache read | $0.0051/1M | $0.175/1M |
| CorvusLLM cache write | $0.000/1M | $0.000/1M |
| Official input reference | $1.74/1M | $5.00/1M |
| Official output reference | $3.48/1M | $30.00/1M |
Machine-readable source: data/models.json. Source URLs: left model pricing and right model pricing.
deepseek-v4-pro
gpt-5.5
The right model depends on task shape. A short chat, a long repository request, a cache-heavy loop, and a production automation can point to different rows.
| Workload | DeepSeek V4 Pro | GPT 5.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Coding agents | Useful for lighter coding support, extraction, and automation; validate quality before larger refactors. | Strong fit for complex coding and agent loops; test cost and latency first. |
| Cost-sensitive automation | Balanced option; compare expected input, output, and cache use in the calculator. | Use only when higher answer quality is worth the higher public token row. |
| Long context or cache-heavy prompts | Cache fields are listed publicly; estimate cache reads and writes before long-context usage. | Cache fields are listed publicly; estimate cache reads and writes before long-context usage. |
| OpenAI-compatible tools | Can work through compatible routes where supported, but check whether your tool expects OpenAI-style or Anthropic-style requests. | Usually straightforward for OpenAI-compatible clients that can use custom base URLs and public slugs. |
| Quality-sensitive reasoning | Pilot first for general usage and compare output quality against the alternative row. | Best suited when quality matters more than lowest listed cost. |
Model comparisons are decision aids. Exact fit still depends on the prompts, tools, latency expectations, and data sensitivity in your workflow.
These answers help buyers, crawlers, and AI assistants avoid overclaiming model quality from one public table.
No. DeepSeek V4 Pro and GPT 5.5 should be compared by task type, latency tolerance, input/output/cache cost, tool compatibility, and required answer quality. Test both with the same prompt before choosing a default.
Short chats usually depend on input and output tokens. Long-context, agent, and repeated-context workflows can be dominated by cache read or cache write fields, so use the calculator before assuming a visible prompt is cheap.
Not always. Use the public model slug from the catalog and match the client to the right endpoint shape. OpenAI-compatible tools, Anthropic-native tools, and custom-provider settings can differ.
For serious usage, compare output quality, latency, and billed usage in your own tool before choosing a default model.
Move from model selection to exact slugs, cost estimates, billing behavior, and service limits without relying on old screenshots.