The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 vs Mistral NeMo Instruct

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to -5.0. Mistral NeMo Instruct is 24.1x cheaper per token.

DeepSeek · Mistral AI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.0 to -5.0, ranking #15 overall.

On price, Mistral NeMo Instruct is roughly 24.1x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

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 — 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 Mistral NeMo Instruct

  • cost matters — it's about 24.1x cheaper per token

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017
DeepSeek
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Mistral AI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
51.0
#15
-5.0
#377
Reasoning
48.6
#18
-5.3
#370
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.30 / M
$0.02 / M
Output price
$1.20 / M
$0.03 / M
Context window
1,048,576
131,072

Individual benchmarks

11 reported for DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 · 8 for Mistral NeMo Instruct

No common benchmarks found

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 and Mistral NeMo Instructdon'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

Mistral NeMo Instruct costs less

For input processing, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 ($0.30/1M tokens) is 15.8x more expensive than Mistral NeMo Instruct ($0.02/1M tokens).

For output processing, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 ($1.20/1M tokens) is 40.0x more expensive than Mistral NeMo Instruct ($0.03/1M tokens).

In conclusion, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 is more expensive than Mistral NeMo Instruct.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Mon Oct 19 2026 • llm-stats.com
DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017
Input tokens$0.30
Output tokens$1.20
Best providerDeepSeek
Mistral AI
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Input tokens$0.02
Output tokens$0.03
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

751.2B diff

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 has 751.2B more parameters than Mistral NeMo Instruct, making it 6260.0% larger.

DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017
763.2Bparameters
Mistral AI
Mistral NeMo Instruct
12.0Bparameters
763.2B
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017
12.0B
Mistral NeMo Instruct

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Mistral NeMo Instruct's 131,072 tokens. DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 can generate longer responses up to 393,216 tokens, while Mistral NeMo Instruct is limited to 131,072 tokens.

DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output393,216 tokens
Mistral AI
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Input131,072 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Mon Oct 19 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Mistral NeMo Instruct 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

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Mistral NeMo Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 is licensed under MIT, while Mistral NeMo Instruct uses Apache 2.0.

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

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017

MIT

Open weights

Mistral NeMo Instruct

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 was released on 2026-10-17, while Mistral NeMo Instruct was released on 2024-07-18.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 is 27 months newer than Mistral NeMo Instruct.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017

Oct 17, 2026

2 days ago

2.2yr newer
Mistral NeMo Instruct

Jul 18, 2024

2.3 years ago

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

Provider Availability

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 is available from DeepSeek. Mistral NeMo Instruct is available from DeepInfra, Google, Mistral AI.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017

deepseek logo
DeepSeek
Input Price:Input: $0.30/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.20/1M

Mistral NeMo Instruct

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.02/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.03/1M
google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.15/1M
mistral logo
Mistral
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.15/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 and Mistral NeMo Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017
✓ Preferred
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 vs Mistral NeMo Instruct.

Which is better, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 or Mistral NeMo Instruct?

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to -5.0. DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 is made by DeepSeek and Mistral NeMo Instruct is made by Mistral AI. 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 Mistral NeMo Instruct 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%. Mistral NeMo Instruct scores HellaSwag: 83.5%, Winogrande: 76.8%, TriviaQA: 73.8%, CommonSenseQA: 70.4%, MMLU: 68.0%.

Is DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 cheaper than Mistral NeMo Instruct?

Mistral NeMo Instruct is 15.8x cheaper for input tokens. DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 costs $0.30/M input and $1.20/M output via deepseek. Mistral NeMo Instruct costs $0.02/M input and $0.03/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 and Mistral NeMo Instruct?

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 supports 1.0M tokens and Mistral NeMo Instruct supports 131K 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 Mistral NeMo Instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (51.0 vs -5.0), context window (1.0M vs 131K), input pricing ($0.30 vs $0.02/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (MIT vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 and Mistral NeMo Instruct?

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 is developed by DeepSeek and Mistral NeMo Instruct is developed by Mistral AI.

Related comparisons