DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 vs Ling 3.0 Flash
DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 leads the LLM Stats Score 50.6 to 36.0. Ling 3.0 Flash is 18.1x cheaper per token.
DeepSeek · InclusionAI · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 50.6 to 36.0, ranking #18 overall.
In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, Ling 3.0 Flash is roughly 18.1x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.
Choose DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813
- overall performance matters — it scores 50.6 and ranks #18 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
- you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026
- you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
Choose Ling 3.0 Flash
- cost matters — it's about 18.1x cheaper per token
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
12 reported for DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 · 19 for Ling 3.0 Flash
DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (Terminal-Bench 2.1), while Ling 3.0 Flash is better at 0 benchmarks.
DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 ($1.30/1M tokens) is 21.7x more expensive than Ling 3.0 Flash ($0.06/1M tokens).
For output processing, DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 ($2.60/1M tokens) is 14.4x more expensive than Ling 3.0 Flash ($0.18/1M tokens).
In conclusion, DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 is more expensive than Ling 3.0 Flash.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 has 1476.0B more parameters than Ling 3.0 Flash, making it 1190.3% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Ling 3.0 Flash's 131,072 tokens. DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 can generate longer responses up to 1,048,576 tokens, while Ling 3.0 Flash is limited to 131,072 tokens.
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 was released on 2026-08-13, while Ling 3.0 Flash was released on 2026-08-04.
DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 is 0 month newer than Ling 3.0 Flash.
Aug 13, 2026
1 months ago
1w newerAug 4, 2026
2 months ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.
Unable to compare the recency of their training data.
Provider Availability
DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 is available from DeepInfra, DeepSeek, Novita, Together. Ling 3.0 Flash is available from DeepInfra.
DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813
Ling 3.0 Flash
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 and Ling 3.0 Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about DeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813 vs Ling 3.0 Flash.