Model comparison
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen Turbo
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 26.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 3.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when DeepSeek V4.1 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeek
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads 48.4 to 14.5.
- Qwen Turbo is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.15 / $0.60 for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Qwen Turbo | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | DeepSeek | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 50.3 | 26.8 |
| Released | 2026-09-09 | 2024-11-01 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| Max output | 393K | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.15 | $0.05 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.60 | $0.20 |
| Results tracked | 25 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 52.8 (#29), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1620 | — |
| SciCode | 51.9% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1511 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,092 | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 46.2 (#39), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 89.6% | — |
| CritPt | 14.3% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1485 | — |
| 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), Qwen Turbo: 14.5 (#291)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 6.1% |
| ProofBench | 54% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1493 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 56.2% |
Knowledge DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 41.6 (#97), Qwen Turbo: 22.2 (#267)
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 41.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1505 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 55.5 (#29), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1452 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1506 | — |
| LMArena French | 1448 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1473 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1499 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 77.6 (#24), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1475 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 45.2 (#46), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1476 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 65.8 (#43), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1465 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1436 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1540 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1460 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash better than Qwen Turbo?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 26.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 3.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when DeepSeek V4.1 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Qwen Turbo?
Qwen Turbo is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; DeepSeek V4.1 Flash lists at $0.15 and $0.60.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both accept 1M tokens.
How many benchmarks do DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and Qwen Turbo share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has 25 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Turbo has 3.