DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 vs LongCat-Flash-Chat
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 19.5. DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 and LongCat-Flash-Chat cost the same.
DeepSeek · Meituan · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 19.5, ranking #15 overall.
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 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-V4.1-Flash-1017
- overall performance matters — it scores 51.0 and ranks #15 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
- you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026
Choose LongCat-Flash-Chat
- you want predictable pricing at $0.30/M input and $1.20/M output
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
11 reported for DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 · 16 for LongCat-Flash-Chat
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 and LongCat-Flash-Chatdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 ($0.30/1M tokens) costs the same as LongCat-Flash-Chat ($0.30/1M tokens).
For output processing, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 ($1.20/1M tokens) costs the same as LongCat-Flash-Chat ($1.20/1M tokens).
In conclusion, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 and LongCat-Flash-Chat cost the same.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 has 203.2B more parameters than LongCat-Flash-Chat, making it 36.3% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to LongCat-Flash-Chat's 128,000 tokens. DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 can generate longer responses up to 393,216 tokens, while LongCat-Flash-Chat is limited to 128,000 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 supports multimodal inputs, whereas LongCat-Flash-Chat does not.
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017
LongCat-Flash-Chat
License
Usage and distribution terms
Both models are licensed under MIT.
Both models share the same licensing terms, providing consistent usage rights.
MIT
Open weights
MIT
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 was released on 2026-10-17, while LongCat-Flash-Chat was released on 2025-08-29.
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 is 14 months newer than LongCat-Flash-Chat.
Oct 17, 2026
2 days ago
1.1yr newerAug 29, 2025
1.1 years 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-V4.1-Flash-1017 is available from DeepSeek. LongCat-Flash-Chat is available from Meituan.
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017
LongCat-Flash-Chat
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 and LongCat-Flash-Chat side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 vs LongCat-Flash-Chat.
Related comparisons
More DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 comparisons
- DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 vs MiniMax M3.1 Flash
- DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 vs Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)
- DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 vs Muse Spark Open
- DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 vs Nemotron 3.5 Bolt (74B A9B 24GB)
- DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 vs Nemotron 3.5 Super VL (120B A12B)
- DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 vs Muse Wonder