Model comparison
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM-4.6
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 40.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeekSummary
- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher in 8 categories and GLM-4.6 in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads 46.2 to 23.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 51.9% for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and 38.4% for GLM-4.6.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $2.20 for GLM-4.6.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 205K.
Side by side
| DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-4.6 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 50.3 | 40.9 |
| Released | 2026-09-09 | 2025-09-30 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 1M | 205K |
| Max output | 393K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.15 | $0.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.60 | $2.20 |
| Results tracked | 25 | 29 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 52.8 (#29), GLM-4.6: 39.9 (#137)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1620 | 1339 |
| SciCode | 51.9% | 38.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1511 | 1449 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,092 | 340.82 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 55.4% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: —, GLM-4.6: 32.1 (#60)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 24.5% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 72.4% |
Reasoning DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 46.2 (#39), GLM-4.6: 23.1 (#168)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 14.3% | 1.1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1485 | 1440 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 47.4% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 89.6% | — |
| DTBench | 89.9% | — |
| LMCA | 47% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 46.3% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155.01 | — |
Math DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 48.4 (#52), GLM-4.6: 36.4 (#115)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1493 | 1431 |
| ProofBench | 54% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 3.8% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 2.1% |
Knowledge DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 41.6 (#97), GLM-4.6: 39.6 (#118)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1505 | 1432 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 9.5% |
Multilingual DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 55.5 (#29), GLM-4.6: 53.6 (#62)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1452 | 1426 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1506 | 1500 |
| LMArena French | 1448 | 1459 |
| LMArena Russian | 1473 | 1418 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1499 | 1436 |
| LMArena German | — | 1447 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1394 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1401 |
Instruction Following DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 77.6 (#24), GLM-4.6: 74.5 (#93)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1475 | 1410 |
Long Context DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 45.2 (#46), GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#91)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1476 | 1423 |
Writing & Preference DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 65.8 (#43), GLM-4.6: 61.3 (#86)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GLM-4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1465 | 1440 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1436 | 1411 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1540 | 1411 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1460 | 1427 |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash better than GLM-4.6?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 40.9 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or GLM-4.6?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; GLM-4.6 lists at $0.60 and $2.20.
Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or GLM-4.6 better for coding?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.8 versus 39.9 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 205K.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and GLM-4.6 share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has 25 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.6 has 29.