Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 17, 2026noindex (thin pair)

DeepSeek Coder V2 vs Pareto Code Router benchmark

Name: DeepSeek Coder V2 vs Pareto Code Router AI benchmark comparison
Creator: CompareLLM
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This page compares DeepSeek Coder V2 (DeepSeek) and Pareto Code Router (openrouter) using the latest snapshots we have as of Aug 17, 2026. Pareto Code Router wins on output price at $-1,000,000/1M. Pareto Code Router has the larger context window (2M tokens). Every cell below is a dated snapshot from a named public source — we do not invent missing scores, and we do not run SWE-bench ourselves.

Share Analysis:

WhatsApp Telegram X / Post LinkedIn Reddit

DeepSeek

DeepSeek Coder V2

DeepSeek open-weight Mixture-of-Experts coding model supporting 338 programming languages and 128k context.

Elo 1,365$0.28/1M out

openrouter

Pareto Code Router

Auto-discovered from OpenRouter (openrouter/pareto-code). Preview until a second source matches.

$-1000000/1M out

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Instant pairwise benchmark recalculation across 400+ LLMs

Model A

Model B

Quick vs:vs Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

DeepSeek Coder V2 (7)vsPareto Code Router (3)

DeepSeek Coder V2: 7W (70%)Overall: DeepSeek Coder V2Pareto Code Router: 3W (30%)

← DeepSeek Coder V2Pareto Code Router →

DeepSeek Coder V2 (5/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,365vs—

Coding Elo

1,442vs—

SWE-bench

60.5%vs—

LiveBench

58.6%vs—

GPQA Diamond

70.2%vs—

DeepSeek Coder V2: 5WPareto Code Router: 0W

DeepSeek Coder V2 (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

75 tok/svs—

Time to first token

290 msvs—

DeepSeek Coder V2: 2WPareto Code Router: 0W

Pareto Code Router (3/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$0.28/1Mvs$-1,000,000/1M

Input price

$0.14/1Mvs$-1,000,000/1M

Context window

128kvs2M

DeepSeek Coder V2: 0WPareto Code Router: 3W

Capability Matchup Radar

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Each spoke is a skill. Farther from the center is better (0–100th percentile). Tap any dot to inspect details.

Tap any node to inspect

Percentile 0–100

Dimensional AdvantageDeepSeek Coder V2 4/6

Preference Elo

No shared data

Throughput Speed

No shared data

Price Efficiency

Pareto Code Router

$1000000.28/1M cheaper

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

—

Elo

High is better

1,365

EloHigh is better

—

Code Elo

High is better

1,442

Code EloHigh is better

—

LiveBench

High is better

58.6%

LiveBenchHigh is better

—

SWE-bench

High is better

60.5%

SWE-benchHigh is better

—

GPQA

High is better

70.2%

GPQAHigh is better

—

TTFT

Low is better

290 ms

TTFTLow is better

—

Speed

High is better

75 tok/s

SpeedHigh is better

—

In $

Low is better

$0.14/1M

In $Low is better

$-1,000,000/1M

Out $

Low is better

$0.28/1M

Out $Low is better

$-1,000,000/1M

Context

High is better

128k

ContextHigh is better

2M+1463%

Key Selection Recommendations

1
Pareto Code Router:Pick Pareto Code Router when you are optimizing output cost.
2
Pareto Code Router:Pick Pareto Code Router for million-token RAG or long-document jobs.

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsinsufficient data

Need SWE-bench on both sides.

High-volume chatPareto Code Router

Lower output list price ($-1,000,000/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIinsufficient data

Need TTFT on both sides.

Long-document RAGPareto Code Router

Larger window (2M).

Screenshots / visionPareto Code Router

Pareto Code Router is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	insufficient data	Need SWE-bench on both sides.
High-volume chat	Pareto Code Router	Lower output list price ($-1,000,000/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	insufficient data	Need TTFT on both sides.
Long-document RAG	Pareto Code Router	Larger window (2M).
Screenshots / vision	Pareto Code Router	Pareto Code Router is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Community Sentiment

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!

Share card

The real PNG is generated at /compare/deepseek-coder-v2-vs-pareto-code/opengraph-image for crawlers.

PNG

CompareLLM Matrix

Verified head-to-head card

LIVE

DeepSeek

DeepSeek Coder V2

Elo 1,365

LiveBench58.6%

SWE-bench60.5%

Speed75 tok/s

Output cost$0.28/1M

openrouter

Pareto Code Router

Elo n/a

LiveBench—

SWE-bench—

Speed—

Output cost$-1,000,000/1M

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, DeepSeek Coder V2 or Pareto Code Router?: We do not have preference Elo for both models, so we do not declare an overall winner. Compare the metrics that exist.
Which is better at coding, DeepSeek Coder V2 or Pareto Code Router?: SWE-bench is missing for at least one model, so we do not rank coding from a single number.
Which is cheaper to run in production?: Pareto Code Router output tokens are $-1,000,000/1M versus $0.28/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.
Which is faster, DeepSeek Coder V2 or Pareto Code Router?: We do not have TTFT for both models.
Which has the larger context window?: Pareto Code Router accepts 2M tokens versus 128k.
Can I self-host either model?: DeepSeek Coder V2 is marked open-weights in our catalog. The other side is a closed API. Check the provider license before you ship weights.
Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?: No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.
What does preference Elo mean on this page?: Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. DeepSeek Coder V2 and Pareto Code Router Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All DeepSeek Coder V2 matchups →|All Pareto Code Router matchups →

DeepSeek Coder V2 vs DeepSeek V3 (next deepseek)DeepSeek V4 Flash vs DeepSeek Coder V2 DeepSeek V4 Pro vs DeepSeek Coder V2 DeepSeek R1 vs DeepSeek Coder V2 Mistral Large 3 vs DeepSeek Coder V2 Llama 4 Maverick vs DeepSeek Coder V2

DeepSeek Coder V2 vs Pareto Code Router benchmark

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

DeepSeek Coder V2 (7)vsPareto Code Router (3)

DeepSeek Coder V2: 7W (70%)Overall: DeepSeek Coder V2Pareto Code Router: 3W (30%)

← DeepSeek Coder V2Pareto Code Router →

DeepSeek Coder V2 (5/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,365vs—

Coding Elo

1,442vs—

SWE-bench

60.5%vs—

LiveBench

58.6%vs—

GPQA Diamond

70.2%vs—

DeepSeek Coder V2: 5WPareto Code Router: 0W

DeepSeek Coder V2 (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

75 tok/svs—

Time to first token

290 msvs—

DeepSeek Coder V2: 2WPareto Code Router: 0W

Pareto Code Router (3/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$0.28/1Mvs$-1,000,000/1M

Input price

$0.14/1Mvs$-1,000,000/1M

Context window

128kvs2M

DeepSeek Coder V2: 0WPareto Code Router: 3W

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsinsufficient data

Need SWE-bench on both sides.

High-volume chatPareto Code Router

Lower output list price ($-1,000,000/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIinsufficient data

Need TTFT on both sides.

Long-document RAGPareto Code Router

Larger window (2M).

Screenshots / visionPareto Code Router

Pareto Code Router is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	insufficient data	Need SWE-bench on both sides.
High-volume chat	Pareto Code Router	Lower output list price ($-1,000,000/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	insufficient data	Need TTFT on both sides.
Long-document RAG	Pareto Code Router	Larger window (2M).
Screenshots / vision	Pareto Code Router	Pareto Code Router is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, DeepSeek Coder V2 or Pareto Code Router?

We do not have preference Elo for both models, so we do not declare an overall winner. Compare the metrics that exist.

Which is better at coding, DeepSeek Coder V2 or Pareto Code Router?

SWE-bench is missing for at least one model, so we do not rank coding from a single number.

Which is cheaper to run in production?

Pareto Code Router output tokens are $-1,000,000/1M versus $0.28/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.

Which is faster, DeepSeek Coder V2 or Pareto Code Router?

We do not have TTFT for both models.

Which has the larger context window?

Pareto Code Router accepts 2M tokens versus 128k.

Can I self-host either model?

DeepSeek Coder V2 is marked open-weights in our catalog. The other side is a closed API. Check the provider license before you ship weights.

Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?

No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.

What does preference Elo mean on this page?

Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. DeepSeek Coder V2 and Pareto Code Router Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.