DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25) vs LongCat 2.0
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25) by DeepSeek or LongCat 2.0 by LongCat? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
LongCat 2.0 scores 7.7 points higher (19.1 vs 11.4) but costs 1.2× as much to run the benchmark ($545 vs $461; premium vs mid-range cost classes). Pick LongCat 2.0 when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25).
| Metric | DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25) | LongCat 2.0 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 11.4 | 19.1 | +67.5% LongCat 2.0 is 67.5% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $460.74 | $544.74 | +18.2% LongCat 2.0 is 18.2% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 20.16s | 35.69s | +77.0% LongCat 2.0 is 77.0% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $4.00 | $0.75 / $2.95 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text |
LongCat 2.0 vs DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25): 67.5% more intelligence, 18.2% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 77.0% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
- LongCat 2.0 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (High) scores 50.20 for $521.
DeepSeek R1 (Jan '25)LongCat 2.0Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-r1-0120/longcat-2-0 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-r1-0120/longcat-2-0?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill