Model comparison
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.8 to 48.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 30 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeekSummary
- They share 30 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher in 6 categories and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) in 4 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads 66.7 to 48.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 54% for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and 14% for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning).
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $2.50 for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning).
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 52.8 | 48.6 |
| Released | 2026-09-09 | 2026-02-17 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| Max output | 393K | 30K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.15 | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.60 | $2.50 |
| Results tracked | 37 | 46 |
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: 52.9 (#32), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 42.1 (#112)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1619 | 1375 |
| LMArena Coding | 1506 | 1459 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,092 | 1,150 |
| SciCode | 51.9% | — |
| WeirdML | — | 52.3% |
Agentic & Tool Use Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 31.2 (#69), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 34.4 (#46)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 57.3% |
| APEX-Agents | 39.5% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 18% |
| GDP.pdf | 19.8% | — |
| LMArena Search | — | 1189 |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 4,663 |
Reasoning Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 50.2 (#36), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.3 (#32)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 89.6% | 85.4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1483 | 1451 |
| DTBench | 89.9% | 90.1% |
| LMCA | 47% | 38.7% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 154.9 | 151.98 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 65.1% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 75% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 89.5% |
| CritPt | 14.3% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 24% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 63.8% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 43% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 46.3% | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 61.4 |
Math DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 66.7 (#25), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 48.2 (#65)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 67.4% | 44.9% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 26.8% | 17.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.3% | 92.2% |
| ProofBench | 54% | 14% |
| LMArena Math | 1477 | 1455 |
Knowledge DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 57.9 (#38), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.8 (#60)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 89.8% | 89.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1506 | 1439 |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 30.2% |
Multimodal DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 39.1 (#61), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 33.3 (#98)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1277 | 1263 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 0% |
| Furniture Assembly | 34.2% | — |
| LMArena Document | — | 1416 |
Multilingual Too close to call
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 55.0 (#35), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 54.5 (#40)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1448 | 1441 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1497 | 1481 |
| LMArena French | 1452 | 1476 |
| LMArena German | 1484 | 1465 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1412 | 1449 |
| LMArena Korean | 1452 | 1417 |
| LMArena Russian | 1471 | 1458 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1459 | 1443 |
Instruction Following DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 77.3 (#26), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 74.8 (#83)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1474 | 1420 |
Long Context Too close to call
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 45.2 (#47), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 45.5 (#34)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1475 | 1437 |
| CL-bench | — | 22.2% |
| CL-bench Life | — | 11.9% |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 65.4 (#48), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 65.7 (#44)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1462 | 1451 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1435 | 1438 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1540 | 1574 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1457 | 1456 |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash better than Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.8 to 48.6 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) lists at $1.25 and $2.50.
Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) better for coding?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.9 versus 42.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both accept 1M tokens.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) share?
30 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has 37 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) has 46.