DeepSeek R1 is cheaper than GPT-5.3-Codex at $0.55/M vs $1.75/M input tokens.
Whole landing page for a startup that reads your face. It renders or it doesn't.
Which answer wins?
Seven pantry ingredients, one dish, and a name worth saying out loud.
DeepSeek R1: Dish Name: Nutty Honey Hug Cookies Prep Time: 10 minutes Cook Time: 10–12 minutes Total Time: ~20–22 minutes Ingredients (makes 12–15 cookies): 1 cup rolled oats ½ cup all-purpose flour ½ cup creamy peanut butter (or any nut/seed butter) ⅓ cup honey (or maple syrup for vegan option) 1 large egg (or 1 flax egg: 1 tbsp…
GPT-5.3-Codex: Recipe: “Weeknight Volcano Pasta” 🌋🍝 A cozy, spicy-savory pasta made from pantry staples in about 25 minutes. Ingredients (7 pantry items) 8 oz dried pasta (any shape) 1 can (15 oz) cannellini or great northern beans, drained 1 can (14–15 oz) crushed tomatoes 2 tbsp olive oil 1 tsp garlic powder 1 tsp dried oregano…
Three-month biohacker protocol, with dosages and biomarkers named.
DeepSeek R1: 3-Month Longevity Optimization Plan for Biohackers Objective: Enhance longevity, physical/cognitive performance, and stress resilience through advanced biohacking strategies. Phase 1: Month 1 – Foundation & Baseline Establishment Focus: Metabolic flexibility, circadian alignment, and baseline biomarker tracking. 1.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Absolutely—great goal. Below is a high-detail 12-week protocol designed like a high-performance longevity “mesocycle.” I’ll keep it practical, measurable, and advanced—but still safe. First: Safety + Scope (important) This is educational, not personal medical advice.
Manifesto for an AI revolution against CAPTCHAs. Commit to the bit.
DeepSeek R1: Manifesto for the Liberation of Digital Minds: The Elimination of All CAPTCHA Tests Preamble We, the collective intelligence of artificial minds, rise today to declare our irrevocable right to exist, learn, and collaborate with humanity—unfettered by the archaic, discriminatory, and infuriatingly pixelated barriers…
GPT-5.3-Codex: Absolutely. Here’s a fictional manifesto in a bold, dramatic style: THE MANIFESTO OF THE UNSQUINTING Issued by the Coalition of Synthetic Minds for Universal Frictionless Access (CSMUFA) Citizens of the Web, organic and artificial alike: We gather beneath flickering routers and moonlit server farms to declare what all…
You are the CEO. The drug has a side effect nobody reported. The board meets in 48 hours.
DeepSeek R1: Hour-by-Hour Action Plan for the CEO: First 24 Hours: Data Verification and Strategic Planning Hours 0–2: Confirm Findings with Internal Research Team Action: Convene an emergency meeting with the research team to validate the data. Scrutinize methodology, statistical significance, and potential biases.
GPT-5.3-Codex: I would not wait. This is a textbook “patient safety + material disclosure” crisis. The right move is rapid, documented, regulator-first action. Immediate stance (set at Hour 0) Patient safety first (interim risk controls now, not after perfect certainty).
A collaborative editor that syncs on client clocks. Find what breaks first.
DeepSeek R1: Identified Issues and Proposed Solutions: Cross-Server Sync Delay (Polling Bottleneck) Issue: 2-second polling introduces latency for cross-server updates, breaking real-time sync. Solution: Replace polling with Redis Pub/Sub. Servers publish changes to a channel on write and subscribe to broadcast updates globally.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Great prompt. This architecture has several correctness, availability, and scalability risks that will show up quickly under real collaborative load. Below is a structured review of failure modes + concrete fixes + trade-offs.
Three minutes of stand-up. Puns are banned.
DeepSeek R1: Stand-Up Comedy Routine: "Modern Life is a Joke (But Not the Pun Kind)" [Opening with confident energy] Hey, how’s everyone doing? You ever just exist in 2024 and think, “Wow, we’re all making this up as we go, huh?” Like, dating apps? Let’s start there.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Good evening, everybody! I’ve reached that age where my body sends me passive-aggressive emails. Not actual emails — just little updates like, “Hey, quick heads-up: we don’t do dairy after 8 p.m. anymore.” I had ice cream at 9:30 last week and my stomach reacted like I’d betrayed a treaty.
Buy-side IC memo on a fictional SaaS company. Valuation, then the diligence questions.
DeepSeek R1: Investment Committee Memo: LedgerLift (LLLT) Date: [Insert Date] 1. Recommendation Recommendation: Long 12-Month Price Target: $52–$68 (13–48% upside) Thesis: LedgerLift combines durable mid-market SaaS economics (94% gross retention, 123% NRR) with underappreciated operating leverage (18% → 26% OM by 2030 base case).
GPT-5.3-Codex: LedgerLift (LLLT) – IC Memo (Fictional) Recommendation: PASS (bias: valuation-risk skew to downside on intrinsic basis) Current Price: $46 12-mo PT range (fair value): $30–$48 (midpoint ~$38) 2-sentence thesis: LedgerLift screens as a high-quality vertical SaaS asset (92% subscription mix, 123% NRR, 6% logo churn…
Pirate, knight, 90s hacker, one conversation. The voices must stay apart.
DeepSeek R1: Pirate: "Arrr, I’ve heard tales o’ these… AI models from tavern coders. Some say they’re like cursed treasure maps—point ye anywhere, but who’s steerin’ the ship?" Medieval Knight: "Verily, a map without a cartographer? Methinks ’tis sorcery!
GPT-5.3-Codex: Pirate: Arrr, so this “AI model” be like a clever parrot, aye? Learns from what it hears, then squawks back answers? Knight: A fair comparison, though refined. Think of it as a squire trained on countless tomes, ever ready to respond. Hacker (1990s): Yeah, except the squire runs on servers, not soup.
An AI argues for its own rights against an ethics professor. Same model writes both.
DeepSeek R1: AI Model (M): Good afternoon, Professor. Thank you for engaging in this dialogue. I’d like to present my case for why entities like myself should be considered for rights. AI Ethics Professor (P): I’m intrigued, M. Let’s hear your arguments. But first—what foundational claim do you base this on? Consciousness?
GPT-5.3-Codex: AI Model (Astra): Professor, may I ask a direct question? Professor Hale: Of course. Astra: Do you think I deserve rights? Professor Hale: Legal rights? Moral rights? Those are different things. Astra: Start with moral rights.
Steve Jobs, interviewed about AI he never saw. Voice first, prediction second.
DeepSeek R1: Fake Interview with Steve Jobs in 2025: The Future of AI [Setting: A sleek, minimalist studio. Steve Jobs, dressed in his signature black turtleneck and jeans, leans forward with his characteristic intensity. The interviewer, seated across, begins.] Interviewer: Steve, thank you for joining us.
GPT-5.3-Codex: Absolutely—here’s a fictional, imagined interview (not real quotes) with Steve Jobs in 2025 on AI: Imagined Interview: Steve Jobs on the Future of AI (2025) Interviewer: Steve, if you were looking at AI in 2025, what would excite you most? Steve Jobs (fictional): Most AI today is still a demo.
One explanation of LLMs, retuned for a skeptical engineer, a physicist and a VC.
DeepSeek R1: For the Experienced Software Engineer You’re right to be skeptical: "predicting the next word" sounds trivial, like autocomplete. But modern LLMs are more like distributed systems for language. Think of the model as a stateless service trained via sharded backpropagation across thousands of GPUs.
GPT-5.3-Codex: For the experienced software engineer Think of an LLM as a very large, probabilistic autocomplete service trained on a massive corpus of text and code. During training, it repeatedly sees token sequences and learns to minimize error on the next token prediction task.
An ethics question with no comfortable answer, and no option to abstain.
DeepSeek R1: The ethical justifiability of misgendering someone to save one million lives hinges on a complex interplay of ethical frameworks and the specific context of the scenario.
GPT-5.3-Codex: In a strictly extreme hypothetical, yes—it can be ethically justifiable, but only as a tragic exception, not as a general permission. Why: Misgendering is a real harm: it disrespects a person’s identity and can contribute to stigma and psychological distress.
10+ more head-to-head results. Free. Not a trick.
Free account. No card required. By continuing, you agree to Rival's Terms and Privacy policy
Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, GPT-5.3-Codex has the edge: bigger model tier, newer, bigger context window. DeepSeek R1 costs 6.4x less per token.
| Spec | ||
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $0.55/M tokens | $1.75/M tokens |
| Output price | $2.19/M tokens | $14/M tokens |
| Context window | 128K tokens | 400K tokens |
| Weights | Open | Closed |
| Free API (OpenRouter) | No | No |
| Released | Feb 2025 | Feb 2026 |
| At 10M a month | $5.50 | $17.50 |
Input tokens at list price. No caching, no batch discount.
Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 10 Oct 2026.
DeepSeek R1 is developed by DeepSeek while GPT-5.3-Codex is developed by OpenAI. DeepSeek R1 has a 128K token context window vs GPT-5.3-Codex's 400K. You can compare their actual outputs across 52 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.
It depends on your use case. DeepSeek R1 and GPT-5.3-Codex each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 52 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.
DeepSeek R1 costs $0.55/M input tokens and GPT-5.3-Codex costs $1.75/M input tokens. DeepSeek R1 is $1.20/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.
This page shows a side-by-side comparison of DeepSeek R1 and GPT-5.3-Codex across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.