Detailed Comparison Analysis

Comprehensive OCR Model Comparison

In-depth comparison of DeepSeek-OCR with other mainstream OCR solutions in key indicators such as accuracy, efficiency, deployment characteristics and cost

97%

DeepSeek OCR Accuracy

Industry Leading

60x

Compared to GOT-OCR Savings

Token Consumption

100%

Open Source Free

No License Fees

Detailed Feature Comparison

功能特性	🚀 DeepSeek-OCR (推荐)	📊 GOT-OCR 2.0	📄 MinerU 2.0	⚡ PaddleOCR	💬 ChatGPT
compare.accuracy	97%	98%	95%	90%	85%
Token Consumption	100/页	6000/页	6000+/页	N/A	N/A
compare.compressionSupport	✅	❌	❌	❌	❌
多语言Markdown	✅	✅	✅	❌	✅
compare.openSource	✅	✅	✅	✅	❌
compare.hardwareRequirements	8GB+ GPU	16GB+ GPU	20GB+ GPU	CPU即可	API调用
compare.deploymentDifficulty	中等	困难	困难	简单	简单
compare.processingSpeed	20万+页/天	5万页/天	2万页/天	1万页/天	API限制

Use Case Recommendations

Academic Research

DeepSeek OCR - Formula recognition

PaddleOCR - Weak formula support

Suitable for processing academic papers containing mathematical formulas, outputting LaTeX format

Enterprise Documents

DeepSeek OCR - Cost effective

ChatGPT - High API cost

Large-scale document processing, cost control is a key consideration

Rapid Prototyping

PaddleOCR - Simple deployment

ChatGPT - Ready to use

Quick validation of ideas, scenarios with low accuracy requirements

Cost Analysis

One-time Deployment Cost

DeepSeek OCR

compare.freeOpenSource

GOT-OCR 2.0

compare.freeOpenSource

MinerU 2.0

compare.freeOpenSource

PaddleOCR

compare.freeOpenSource

ChatGPT API

compare.payPerUse

Operating Cost Comparison

DeepSeek OCR$0.001/页

GOT-OCR 2.0$0.06/页

MinerU 2.0$0.05/页

PaddleOCR$0.01/页

ChatGPT API$0.01-0.05/页

Reasons to Choose DeepSeek OCR

While maintaining 97% accuracy, providing excellent efficiency and 10-20x compression support. Compared to GOT-OCR 2.0, it reduces token consumption by 60x, making it an ideal choice for complex document processing workflows.