Noometry

Model comparison

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen1.5-110B

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.8 to 34.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash DeepSeek

52.8

Rank #38 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-110B Alibaba (Qwen)

34.2

Rank #234 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-110B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads 66.7 to 33.7.

Side by side

DeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen1.5-110B
ProviderDeepSeekAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index52.834.2
Released2026-09-092024-04-25
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1M—
Max output393K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.15—
Output $ / M tokens$0.60—
Results tracked3720

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), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.0 (#264)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Coding15061184
LMArena WebDev1619—
SciCode51.9%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—35%
BigCodeBench Complete—44.4%
ALE-Bench1,092—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 31.2 (#69), Qwen1.5-110B: —

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen1.5-110B
APEX-Agents39.5%—
GDP.pdf19.8%—

Reasoning DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 50.2 (#36), Qwen1.5-110B: 22.7 (#189)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Hard Prompts14831168
NYT Connections (extended)89.6%—
CritPt14.3%—
Mystery Game Puzzles43%—
DTBench89.9%—
LMCA47%—
Surface Evolver Bench46.3%—
Epoch Capabilities Index154.9—
ForecastBench—57.7

Math DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 66.7 (#25), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.7 (#201)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Math14771185
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)67.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 426.8%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202598.3%—
ProofBench54%—

Knowledge DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 57.9 (#38), Qwen1.5-110B: 31.2 (#219)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Expert15061144
GPQA Diamond89.8%—

Multimodal Not comparable

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 39.1 (#61), Qwen1.5-110B: —

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Vision1277—
Furniture Assembly34.2%—

Multilingual DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 55.0 (#35), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.6 (#250)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Non-English14481142
LMArena Chinese14971206
LMArena French14521151
LMArena German14841123
LMArena Japanese14121074
LMArena Korean14521044
LMArena Russian14711118
LMArena Spanish14591142

Instruction Following DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 77.3 (#26), Qwen1.5-110B: 60.3 (#252)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Instruction Following14741158

Long Context DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 45.2 (#47), Qwen1.5-110B: 35.1 (#242)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Longer Query14751157

Writing & Preference DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 65.4 (#48), Qwen1.5-110B: 38.0 (#255)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen1.5-110B
LMArena Text14621175
LMArena Creative Writing14351148
LMArena Multi-Turn14571160
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1540—

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash better than Qwen1.5-110B?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.8 to 34.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Qwen1.5-110B better for coding?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.9 versus 33.0 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and Qwen1.5-110B share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has 37 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-110B has 20.

Related comparisons

Go deeper