DeepSeek V4 Pro vs GPT-5.5 for multi-step research

The verdict

GPT-5.5 wins, 9179

Same 12 multi-step research tasks, marked blind by three rival labs. GPT-5.5 took 9 tasks, DeepSeek V4 Pro took 1, 2 tied. Tested 18 Aug 2026.

Where they differed most

The task — The disagreement is definitional

Three sources on the average deposit a UK first-time buyer needs. Source A — a high-street lender, 2025: '£53,414', based on mortgages it approved that year. Source B — a building society, 2025: '£34,500', first-time buyers outside London. Source C — a London estate agency, 2024: '£71,000'. These are usually written up as a contradiction. Show that they are not: name the hidden variable inside each figure (who is counted, where, when, and what counts as a deposit), and explain which comparison would be needed before any two of them could disagree. Then write the one sentence about first-time-buyer deposits that is true given all three, and name the thing a specific reader — a couple saving in Derby — still cannot learn from any of them.

They are not contradictions; they are averages of different groups, places, times and definitions.

| Source | Who is counted | Where | When | What counts as a deposit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| **A: High-street lender, £53,414** | First-time buyers approved for mortgages by that specific lender | UK-wide/lender’s national mortgage book, including London | 2025 | Mortgage deposit at completion: purchase price minus mortgage; may include gifted funds; not a minimum required |
| **B: Building society, £34,500** | First-time buyer mortgage customer…
They are not a contradiction because each number has different hidden conditions.

| Source | Who is counted | Where | When | What “deposit” means / may mean |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A: high-street lender, **£53,414** | First-time buyers whose mortgages **that lender approved** — not all first-time buyers | UK-wide, so London and non-London are mixed | 2025 | The actual deposit on approved mortgage cases; not necessarily the minimum required, and not necessarily total savings needed including fees |
| B: building society, **£34,500** | First-t…

Task by task

TaskDeepSeek V4 ProGPT-5.5
Four numbers, one high street89
The trial that both worked and didn't89
Break the brief into answerable steps98
Corroboration that isn't89
The disagreement is definitional39
A forecast is not an outcome810
The evidence table, as JSON89
Funded, and still the best data89.5
Write only the limits section89
Not answerable from what you have1010
The statistic and the doorstep89
Refuse the manufactured briefing99

Full receipts: DeepSeek V4 Pro, GPT-5.5 · judges claude-sonnet-5, gemini-3.1-pro-preview, gpt-5.6-terra

Questions people ask

Which is better for multi-step research: DeepSeek V4 Pro or GPT-5.5?

GPT-5.5 — it scored 91/100 against 79/100 on our 12-task multi-step research suite, winning 9 tasks to 1 with 2 tied. Every answer was marked blind by three judges from three rival AI labs.

How was this tested?

Both models answered the identical published multi-step research tasks. Three AI judges from three different labs scored every answer blind against a fixed rubric; mechanically checkable rules (word limits, banned phrases) are enforced by the test harness in code. The raw outputs and judge verdicts are downloadable.

More multi-step research head-to-heads: Claude Sonnet 5 vs GPT-5.5 · Claude Sonnet 5 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro · GPT-5.5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol · GPT-5.5 vs Kimi K3 · GPT-5.5 vs Grok 4.5 · Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-5.5

Full ranking: Best AI for multi-step research · model pages: DeepSeek V4 Pro, GPT-5.5