The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 vs Gemini 4 Carbon

Gemini 4 Carbon leads the LLM Stats Score 59.0 to 50.7.

DeepSeek · Google · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Gemini 4 Carbon leads the overall LLM Stats Score 59.0 to 50.7, ranking #2 overall.

In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017

  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

Choose Gemini 4 Carbon

  • overall performance matters — it scores 59.0 and ranks #2 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017
DeepSeek
Gemini 4 Carbon
Google
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
50.7
#17
59.0
#2
Reasoning
48.0
#22
54.9
#5
Coding
40.0
#15
48.1
#3
Agents
39.0
#11
46.0
#2
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
1 of 1
0 of 1
Input price
$0.30 / M
— / M
Output price
$1.20 / M
— / M
Context window
1,048,576
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

3 shared
Index
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017
Gemini 4 Carbon
Vision
32.4#28
36.0#12
Tool use
31.4#8
35.8#3
Multimodal
34.8#16
38.0#6
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

11 reported for DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 · 16 for Gemini 4 Carbon

1 shared

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (AutomationBench), while Gemini 4 Carbon is better at 0 benchmarks.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Thu Oct 29 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 specifies input context (1,048,576 tokens). Only DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 specifies output context (393,216 tokens).

DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output393,216 tokens
Google
Gemini 4 Carbon
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Thu Oct 29 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 and Gemini 4 Carbon support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Gemini 4 Carbon

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 is licensed under MIT, while Gemini 4 Carbon uses a proprietary license.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017

MIT

Open weights

Gemini 4 Carbon

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 was released on 2026-10-17, while Gemini 4 Carbon was released on 2026-10-28.

Gemini 4 Carbon is 0 month newer than DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017

Oct 17, 2026

1 weeks ago

Gemini 4 Carbon

Oct 28, 2026

-1 days ago

1w newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 and Gemini 4 Carbon side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017
✓ Preferred
Gemini 4 Carbon
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 vs Gemini 4 Carbon.

Which is better, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 or Gemini 4 Carbon?

Gemini 4 Carbon leads the LLM Stats Score 59.0 to 50.7. DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 is made by DeepSeek and Gemini 4 Carbon is made by Google. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 compare to Gemini 4 Carbon in benchmarks?

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 scores BabyVision: 92.5%, Chartography: 83.0%, DeepSWE 1.1: 77.0%, NL2Repo: 68.2%, AutomationBench: 60.5%. Gemini 4 Carbon scores Gray Swan IPI Benchmark: 100.0%, Vending-Bench 2: 100.0%, Graphwalks BFS >128k: 96.2%, WebDev Arena: 88.4%, SEC-bench Pro: 88.2%.

What are the context window sizes for DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 and Gemini 4 Carbon?

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 supports 1.0M tokens and Gemini 4 Carbon supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 and Gemini 4 Carbon?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (50.7 vs 59.0), licensing (MIT vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 and Gemini 4 Carbon?

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 is developed by DeepSeek and Gemini 4 Carbon is developed by Google.

Related comparisons