Model comparison
DeepSeek-V3 vs DeepSeek V4 Flash
DeepSeek V4 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.6 to 39.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 28 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeekSummary
- They share 28 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek-V3 scores higher in 0 categories and DeepSeek V4 Flash in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where DeepSeek V4 Flash leads 53.7 to 20.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 37.8% for DeepSeek-V3 and 94.4% for DeepSeek V4 Flash.
- DeepSeek V4 Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $0.24 / $0.90 for DeepSeek-V3.
- DeepSeek V4 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 164K.
Side by side
| DeepSeek-V3 | DeepSeek V4 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | DeepSeek |
| Noometry Index | 39.5 | 53.6 |
| Released | 2024-12-26 | 2026-04-24 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 164K | 1M |
| Max output | 164K | 393K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.24 | $0.15 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.90 | $0.60 |
| Results tracked | 60 | 41 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding DeepSeek V4 Flash leads
DeepSeek-V3: 42.3 (#106), DeepSeek V4 Flash: 47.9 (#59)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3 | DeepSeek V4 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 35.8% | 49.9% |
| WeirdML | 36.1% | 63% |
| LMArena Coding | 1368 | 1457 |
| FrontierCode | — | 18.8% |
| Aider Polyglot | 55.1% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1582 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 50% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 70.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 62.2% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,306 |
| HumanEval+ | 86.6% | — |
| MBPP+ | 73% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
DeepSeek-V3: —, DeepSeek V4 Flash: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3 | DeepSeek V4 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| METR Time Horizons | 49.6% | — |
Reasoning DeepSeek V4 Flash leads
DeepSeek-V3: 20.5 (#236), DeepSeek V4 Flash: 53.7 (#30)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3 | DeepSeek V4 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 27.2% | 61.1% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 52.3% | 52.2% |
| CritPt | 0% | 16.6% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1365 | 1444 |
| DTBench | 64.8% | 90.9% |
| LMCA | 15.5% | 41.7% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.94 | 154.49 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 61.4% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 89.6% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 89% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 33% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 65.8% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 34% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 60.9% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 87.5% | — |
| ForecastBench | 59.1 | — |
| HellaSwag | 88.9% | — |
| LiveBench | 66.9% | — |
| PIQA | 84.7% | — |
| WinoGrande | 85.2% | — |
Math DeepSeek V4 Flash leads
DeepSeek-V3: 32.1 (#219), DeepSeek V4 Flash: 60.3 (#37)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3 | DeepSeek V4 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 37.8% | 94.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1373 | 1427 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 57.5% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 24.4% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 76.5% |
| ProofBench | — | 56% |
| Omni-MATH | 40.3% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 73.5% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 75.5% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1.7% | — |
Knowledge DeepSeek V4 Flash leads
DeepSeek-V3: 37.5 (#155), DeepSeek V4 Flash: 55.4 (#48)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3 | DeepSeek V4 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 67.6% | 91% |
| LMArena Expert | 1351 | 1441 |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 33.6% |
| MMLU-Pro | 72.3% | — |
| Confabulations | 26.1% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 6.1% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 53.8% | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 95.3% | — |
| MMLU | 87.2% | — |
| TriviaQA | 82.9% | — |
Multilingual DeepSeek V4 Flash leads
DeepSeek-V3: 48.5 (#143), DeepSeek V4 Flash: 53.0 (#72)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3 | DeepSeek V4 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1358 | 1420 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1391 | 1468 |
| LMArena French | 1385 | 1439 |
| LMArena German | 1374 | 1418 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1333 | 1406 |
| LMArena Korean | 1319 | 1384 |
| LMArena Russian | 1373 | 1428 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1358 | 1436 |
Instruction Following DeepSeek V4 Flash leads
DeepSeek-V3: 72.8 (#130), DeepSeek V4 Flash: 74.9 (#81)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3 | DeepSeek V4 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1345 | 1421 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 81.5% | — |
| IFEval | 83.2% | — |
Long Context DeepSeek V4 Flash leads
DeepSeek-V3: 34.0 (#253), DeepSeek V4 Flash: 43.8 (#85)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3 | DeepSeek V4 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1352 | 1434 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 50% | — |
Writing & Preference DeepSeek V4 Flash leads
DeepSeek-V3: 57.4 (#130), DeepSeek V4 Flash: 63.8 (#61)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek-V3 | DeepSeek V4 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1375 | 1432 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1364 | 1403 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1472 | 1559 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1389 | 1449 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 77% | — |
| WildBench | 83% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 49.1% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek-V3 better than DeepSeek V4 Flash?
DeepSeek V4 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.6 to 39.5 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-V3 or DeepSeek V4 Flash?
DeepSeek V4 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; DeepSeek-V3 lists at $0.24 and $0.90.
Is DeepSeek-V3 or DeepSeek V4 Flash better for coding?
DeepSeek V4 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.9 versus 42.3 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
DeepSeek V4 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 164K.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V3 and DeepSeek V4 Flash share?
28 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V3 has 60 scored results on Noometry and DeepSeek V4 Flash has 41.