Model comparison
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs o4-mini
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 41.6 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 6 categories and o4-mini in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads 46.2 to 24.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is LMCA: 47% for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and 26.5% for o4-mini.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $1.10 / $4.40 for o4-mini.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 200K.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | o4-mini | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 50.3 | 41.6 |
| Released | 2026-09-09 | 2025-04-16 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | 200K |
| Max output | 393K | 100K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.15 | $1.10 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.60 | $4.40 |
| Results tracked | 25 | 60 |
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), o4-mini: 41.6 (#110)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | o4-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1511 | 1369 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,092 | 826.17 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 45% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 72% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1620 | — |
| SciCode | 51.9% | — |
| GSO | — | 3.6% |
| WeirdML | — | 52.6% |
| CadEval | — | 62% |
| AlgoTune | — | 1.72 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: —, o4-mini: 32.3 (#57)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | o4-mini |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 53.2% |
| GDPval | — | 25.3% |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 63.9% |
Reasoning DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 46.2 (#39), o4-mini: 24.6 (#143)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | o4-mini |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 14.3% | 0.6% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1485 | 1351 |
| DTBench | 89.9% | 77.6% |
| LMCA | 47% | 26.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 155.01 | 145.63 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 6.1% |
| SimpleBench | — | 38.7% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 67.6% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 89.6% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 58.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 26% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 9.2% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 5% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 46.3% | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 61.8 |
Math DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 48.4 (#52), o4-mini: 40.2 (#79)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | o4-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1493 | 1390 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 36.1% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 4.9% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 81.7% |
| ProofBench | 54% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 72% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 97.8% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 24.8% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 6.3% |
Knowledge o4-mini leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 41.6 (#97), o4-mini: 43.5 (#83)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | o4-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1505 | 1344 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 79.6% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 18.1% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 19.6% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 82% |
| Confabulations | — | 15.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 18.6% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 73.5% |
Multimodal Not comparable
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: —, o4-mini: 39.5 (#46)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | o4-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1194 |
| GeoBench | — | 64% |
| VPCT | — | 57.5% |
Multilingual DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 55.5 (#29), o4-mini: 47.2 (#149)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | o4-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1452 | 1336 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1506 | 1355 |
| LMArena French | 1448 | 1362 |
| LMArena Russian | 1473 | 1334 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1499 | 1346 |
| LMArena German | — | 1336 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1308 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1313 |
Instruction Following DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 77.6 (#24), o4-mini: 75.4 (#63)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | o4-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1475 | 1321 |
| IFEval | — | 92.8% |
Long Context Too close to call
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 45.2 (#46), o4-mini: 45.5 (#31)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | o4-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1476 | 1315 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 77.8% |
Writing & Preference DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 65.8 (#43), o4-mini: 54.2 (#148)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | o4-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1465 | 1353 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1436 | 1294 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1460 | 1350 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 75% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1540 | — |
| WildBench | — | 85.4% |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash better than o4-mini?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 41.6 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or o4-mini?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; o4-mini lists at $1.10 and $4.40.
Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or o4-mini better for coding?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.8 versus 41.6 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and o4-mini share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has 25 scored results on Noometry and o4-mini has 60.