Model comparison

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.8 Max

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 52.8 on the Noometry Index. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash costs 11× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.8 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 34 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash DeepSeek

52.8

Rank #38 Confirmed

Qwen3.8 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

56.8

Rank #22 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 34 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.8 Max in 9 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where Qwen3.8 Max leads 45.4 to 31.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is APEX-Agents: 39.5% for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and 63.3% for Qwen3.8 Max.
  • DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Qwen3.8 Max.
  • DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and Qwen3.8 Max specifications
DeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen3.8 Max
ProviderDeepSeekAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index52.856.8
Released2026-09-092026-08-02
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1M1M
Max output393K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.15$2
Output $ / M tokens$0.60$6
Results tracked3739

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Too close to call

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 52.9 (#32), Qwen3.8 Max: 53.5 (#29)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen3.8 Max
LMArena WebDev16191674
SciCode51.9%53.2%
LMArena Coding15061502
DeepSWE—57.5%
FrontierSWE—17.8%
ALE-Bench1,092—

Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3.8 Max leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 31.2 (#69), Qwen3.8 Max: 45.4 (#14)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen3.8 Max
APEX-Agents39.5%63.3%
GDP.pdf19.8%23.2%
τ²-bench Banking—55.1%

Reasoning Qwen3.8 Max leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 50.2 (#36), Qwen3.8 Max: 54.4 (#26)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen3.8 Max
NYT Connections (extended)89.6%88.3%
CritPt14.3%20%
LMArena Hard Prompts14831496
Mystery Game Puzzles43%38%
DTBench89.9%92%
LMCA47%46.2%
Epoch Capabilities Index154.9156.41
Chess Puzzles—40%
Surface Evolver Bench46.3%—

Math Qwen3.8 Max leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 66.7 (#25), Qwen3.8 Max: 73.2 (#20)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen3.8 Max
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)67.4%74.7%
FrontierMath Tier 426.8%46.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202598.3%100%
ProofBench54%58%
LMArena Math14771499

Knowledge Qwen3.8 Max leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 57.9 (#38), Qwen3.8 Max: 61.7 (#27)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen3.8 Max
GPQA Diamond89.8%92.7%
LMArena Expert15061507
SimpleQA Verified—47.3%

Multimodal DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 39.1 (#61), Qwen3.8 Max: 37.2 (#75)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Vision12771314
Furniture Assembly34.2%20%

Multilingual Qwen3.8 Max leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 55.0 (#35), Qwen3.8 Max: 56.7 (#18)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Non-English14481472
LMArena Chinese14971538
LMArena French14521503
LMArena German14841483
LMArena Japanese14121467
LMArena Korean14521461
LMArena Russian14711481
LMArena Spanish14591492

Instruction Following Too close to call

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 77.3 (#26), Qwen3.8 Max: 77.6 (#17)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Instruction Following14741479

Long Context Too close to call

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 45.2 (#47), Qwen3.8 Max: 45.6 (#31)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Longer Query14751489

Writing & Preference Qwen3.8 Max leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 65.4 (#48), Qwen3.8 Max: 67.1 (#30)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen3.8 Max
LMArena Text14621483
LMArena Creative Writing14351479
LMArena Multi-Turn14571489
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1540—

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash better than Qwen3.8 Max?

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 52.8 on the Noometry Index. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash costs 11× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.8 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Qwen3.8 Max?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 Max lists at $2 and $6.

Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Qwen3.8 Max better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (52.9 vs 53.5); test both on your own repository before choosing.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 1M tokens.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and Qwen3.8 Max share?

34 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has 37 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 Max has 39.

Related comparisons

Go deeper