Model comparison

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen2.5 Plus 1127

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 38.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash DeepSeek

50.3

Rank #40 Confirmed

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 Alibaba (Qwen)

38.1

Rank #179 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads 46.2 to 24.8.
  • DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 specifications
DeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen2.5 Plus 1127
ProviderDeepSeekAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index50.338.1
Released2026-09-09—
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1M—
Max output393K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.15—
Output $ / M tokens$0.60—
Results tracked2514

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: 52.8 (#29), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 37.9 (#171)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Coding15111314
LMArena WebDev1620—
SciCode51.9%—
ALE-Bench1,092—

Reasoning DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 46.2 (#39), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 24.8 (#139)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Hard Prompts14851299
NYT Connections (extended)89.6%—
CritPt14.3%—
DTBench89.9%—
LMCA47%—
Surface Evolver Bench46.3%—
Epoch Capabilities Index155.01—

Math DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 48.4 (#52), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 33.5 (#175)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Math14931298
ProofBench54%—

Knowledge DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 41.6 (#97), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 34.9 (#179)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Expert15051289

Multilingual DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 55.5 (#29), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 42.1 (#196)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Non-English14521265
LMArena Chinese15061314
LMArena Russian14731271
LMArena French1448—
LMArena German—1231
LMArena Japanese—1207
LMArena Spanish1499—

Instruction Following DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 77.6 (#24), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.4 (#194)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Instruction Following14751275

Long Context DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 45.2 (#46), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#180)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Longer Query14761292

Writing & Preference DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 65.8 (#43), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.5 (#186)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Text14651299
LMArena Creative Writing14361262
LMArena Multi-Turn14601299
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1540—

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash better than Qwen2.5 Plus 1127?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 38.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better for coding?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.8 versus 37.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has 25 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14.

Related comparisons

Go deeper