DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 vs Nova Pro
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 11.9. DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 is 2.7x cheaper per token.
DeepSeek · Amazon · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 11.9, ranking #15 overall.
On price, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 is roughly 2.7x 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 and coding — it leads those capability indexes
- cost matters — it's about 2.7x cheaper per token
- you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026
- you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
Choose Nova Pro
- you want predictable pricing at $0.80/M input and $3.20/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 · 27 for Nova Pro
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 and Nova Prodon'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) is 2.7x cheaper than Nova Pro ($0.80/1M tokens).
For output processing, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 ($1.20/1M tokens) is 2.7x cheaper than Nova Pro ($3.20/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Nova Pro is more expensive than DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Nova Pro's 300,000 tokens. DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 can generate longer responses up to 393,216 tokens, while Nova Pro is limited to 300,000 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Both DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 and Nova Pro support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017
Nova Pro
License
Usage and distribution terms
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 is licensed under MIT, while Nova Pro uses a proprietary license.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
MIT
Open weights
Proprietary
Closed source
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 was released on 2026-10-17, while Nova Pro was released on 2024-11-20.
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 is 23 months newer than Nova Pro.
Oct 17, 2026
2 days ago
1.9yr newerNov 20, 2024
1.9 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. Nova Pro is available from Bedrock.
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017
Nova Pro
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 and Nova Pro side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 vs Nova Pro.
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