DeepSeek OCR 2 vs Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview
Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview comes out ahead, 50 to 32 on our weighted score, though DeepSeek OCR 2 is 48% cheaper per token.
DeepSeekDeepSeek OCR 2
32/100- ECI—
- Price$0.89 / $1.47
- Context8K
- Our pick
GoogleGemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview
50/100- ECI—
- Price$1.00 / $5.00
- Context131K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview is our pick
Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview is the better all-round choice, scoring 50/100 against DeepSeek OCR 2 (32). It leads on inputs & features and context window. DeepSeek OCR 2 wins on price. 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 $1.03 · Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview $2.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGemini Robotics-ER 1.6 PreviewGemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview 131,072 · DeepSeek OCR 2 8,192 tokens
- Widest inputsGemini Robotics-ER 1.6 PreviewDeepSeek OCR 2: Text, Images · Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview: Text, Images, Audio, Video
- Self-hostingDeepSeek OCR 2Publishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | DeepSeek OCR 2 | Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 49 | 36 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 25 | 90 |
| Context window | 20% | 0 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 32/100 | 50/100 |
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 Robotics-ER 1.6 PreviewGoogle |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.89 (best) | $1.00 |
| Output | $1.47 (best) | $5.00 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.03 (best) | $2.00 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 1 providers | Median of 1 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 8,192 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 65,536 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | Yes |
| Video | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | No | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | — |
| API providers | 2 (best) | 1 |
| Released | Jan 27, 2026 | Apr 14, 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$11.83
- Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview$20.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: DeepSeek OCR 2 or Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview?
Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview is the better all-round choice, scoring 50/100 against DeepSeek OCR 2 (32). It leads on inputs & features and context window. DeepSeek OCR 2 wins on price. 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 Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview?
DeepSeek OCR 2 is cheaper at $0.89 input / $1.47 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview costs $1.00 input / $5.00 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.03 per million tokens for DeepSeek OCR 2 versus $2.00 for Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview (1.9× 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 Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for DeepSeek OCR 2 and Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview 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 Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview has the largest context window at 131,072 tokens, against 8,192 for DeepSeek OCR 2. Maximum output per response: DeepSeek OCR 2 up to 8,192, Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview up to 65,536 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
DeepSeek OCR 2 accepts text and images; Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview accepts text, images, audio and video. Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
DeepSeek OCR 2 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview is the newest, released Apr 14, 2026. DeepSeek OCR 2 came out Jan 27, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview 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 Oct 4, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add MiniMax-M2.5-highspeedThree-way comparison
- DeepSeek OCR 2 vs MiniMax-M2.5-highspeedMiniMax
- DeepSeek OCR 2 vs Seed 2.0 CodeByteDance Seed
- DeepSeek OCR 2 vs Qwen3.5 122B-A10BAlibaba (Qwen)
- DeepSeek OCR 2 vs Nova 2 LiteAmazon
- Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview vs GLM-5V-TurboZ.ai (Zhipu)
- Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 Preview vs DeepSeek V4 ProDeepSeek
