DeepSeek OCR 2 vs Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite comes out ahead, 72 to 38 on our weighted score, though DeepSeek OCR 2 is 5% cheaper per token.
DeepSeekDeepSeek OCR 2
38/100- ECI—
- Price$0.46 / $0.749
- Context8K
- Our pick
GoogleGemini 3.1 Flash Lite
72/100- ECI—
- Price$0.25 / $1.50
- Context1.05M
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is our pick
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 72/100 against DeepSeek OCR 2 (38). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceDeepSeek OCR 2DeepSeek OCR 2 $0.532 · Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite $0.563 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGemini 3.1 Flash LiteGemini 3.1 Flash Lite 1,048,576 · DeepSeek OCR 2 8,192 tokens
- Widest inputsGemini 3.1 Flash LiteDeepSeek OCR 2: Text, Images · Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video
- Self-hostingDeepSeek OCR 2Publishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | DeepSeek OCR 2 | Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 60 | 59 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 25 | 100 |
| Context window | 20% | 0 | 61 |
| Overall | 100% | 38/100 | 72/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | DeepSeek OCR 2DeepSeek | Gemini 3.1 Flash LiteGoogle |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.46 | $0.25 (best) |
| Output | $0.749 (best) | $1.50 |
| Cached input | — | $0.025 |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.532 (best) | $0.563 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 2 providers | Official Google API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 8,192 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 65,536 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | Yes |
| Audio | No | Yes |
| Video | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | No | Yesminimal · low · medium · high |
| Tool calling | No | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | gemini-3.1-flash-lite |
| API providers | 3 | 26 (best) |
| Released | Jan 27, 2026 | May 7, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Jan 2025 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- DeepSeek OCR 2$6.10
- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite$5.50
Which should you choose?
Which is better: DeepSeek OCR 2 or Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite?
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 72/100 against DeepSeek OCR 2 (38). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek OCR 2 or Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite?
DeepSeek OCR 2 is cheaper at $0.46 input / $0.749 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs $0.25 input / $1.50 output per million tokens (official Google API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.532 per million tokens for DeepSeek OCR 2 versus $0.563 for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite (1.1× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. DeepSeek OCR 2 has not been scored yet and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for DeepSeek OCR 2 and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that DeepSeek OCR 2 does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 8,192 for DeepSeek OCR 2. Maximum output per response: DeepSeek OCR 2 up to 8,192, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite up to 65,536 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
DeepSeek OCR 2 accepts text and images; Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
DeepSeek OCR 2 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is the newest, released May 7, 2026. DeepSeek OCR 2 came out Jan 27, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Jan 2025.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add MiniMax-M2 HerThree-way comparison
- DeepSeek OCR 2 vs MiniMax-M2 HerMiniMax
- DeepSeek OCR 2 vs Qwen3 Coder NextAlibaba (Qwen)
- DeepSeek OCR 2 vs GLM-4.6VZ.ai (Zhipu)
- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite vs CoBuddyBaidu
- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite vs Perceptron Mk1Perceptron
- Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite vs LongCat-2.0Meituan (LongCat)
