The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 vs Qwen3.8 Flash

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 and Qwen3.8 Flash are closely matched at 51.0 and 48.0 on the LLM Stats Score. Qwen3.8 Flash is 2.3x cheaper per token.

DeepSeek · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 and Qwen3.8 Flash are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 51.0 and 48.0.

In the 4 individual benchmarks reported for both models, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 wins 3; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, Qwen3.8 Flash is roughly 2.3x 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

  • your work emphasizes agents — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 3 of 4 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 Oct 2026
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

Choose Qwen3.8 Flash

  • cost matters — it's about 2.3x cheaper per token

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017
DeepSeek
Qwen3.8 Flash
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
51.0
#15
48.0
#32
Reasoning
48.6
#18
48.4
#21
Coding
39.1
#15
33.1
#41
Agents
38.6
#9
32.8
#36
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
3 of 4
1 of 4
Input price
$0.30 / M
$0.15 / M
Output price
$1.20 / M
$0.47 / M
Context window
1,048,576
1,000,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

4 shared
Index
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017
Qwen3.8 Flash
Math
31.8#67
32.8#61
Vision
32.2#26
34.0#19
Tool use
30.9#7
29.7#12
Multimodal
35.0#14
35.3#13
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

11 reported for DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 · 22 for Qwen3.8 Flash

4 shared

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 outperforms in 3 benchmarks (DeepSWE 1.1, Humanity's Last Exam, NL2Repo), while Qwen3.8 Flash is better at 1 benchmark (Agents' Last Exam).

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

Mon Oct 19 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Qwen3.8 Flash costs less

For input processing, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 ($0.30/1M tokens) is 2.0x more expensive than Qwen3.8 Flash ($0.15/1M tokens).

For output processing, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 ($1.20/1M tokens) is 2.6x more expensive than Qwen3.8 Flash ($0.47/1M tokens).

In conclusion, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 is more expensive than Qwen3.8 Flash.*

* 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
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8 Flash
Input tokens$0.15
Output tokens$0.47
Best providerNovita
Notice missing or incorrect data?

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

638.2B diff

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 has 638.2B more parameters than Qwen3.8 Flash, making it 510.6% larger.

DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017
763.2Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8 Flash
125.0Bparameters
763.2B
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017
125.0B
Qwen3.8 Flash

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Qwen3.8 Flash's 1,000,000 tokens. DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 can generate longer responses up to 393,216 tokens, while Qwen3.8 Flash is limited to 131,072 tokens.

DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output393,216 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8 Flash
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Mon Oct 19 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 and Qwen3.8 Flash 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

Qwen3.8 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 is licensed under MIT, while Qwen3.8 Flash 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

Qwen3.8 Flash

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 was released on 2026-10-17, while Qwen3.8 Flash was released on 2026-08-26.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 is 2 months newer than Qwen3.8 Flash.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017

Oct 17, 2026

2 days ago

1mo newer
Qwen3.8 Flash

Aug 26, 2026

1 months 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. Qwen3.8 Flash is available from Novita.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017

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

Qwen3.8 Flash

novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.47/1M
* 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 Qwen3.8 Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017
✓ Preferred
Qwen3.8 Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 vs Qwen3.8 Flash.

Which is better, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 or Qwen3.8 Flash?

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 and Qwen3.8 Flash are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at 51.0 and 48.0. DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 is made by DeepSeek and Qwen3.8 Flash is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. 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 Qwen3.8 Flash 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%. Qwen3.8 Flash scores MathVision: 95.7%, LiveCodeBench v6: 91.9%, GPQA: 91.7%, CharXiv-R: 90.6%, RealWorldQA: 88.5%.

Is DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 cheaper than Qwen3.8 Flash?

Qwen3.8 Flash is 2.0x cheaper for input tokens. DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 costs $0.30/M input and $1.20/M output via deepseek. Qwen3.8 Flash costs $0.15/M input and $0.47/M output via novita.

What are the context window sizes for DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 and Qwen3.8 Flash?

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 supports 1.0M tokens and Qwen3.8 Flash supports 1.0M 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 Qwen3.8 Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (51.0 vs 48.0), context window (1.0M vs 1.0M), input pricing ($0.30 vs $0.15/M), licensing (MIT vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 and Qwen3.8 Flash?

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 is developed by DeepSeek and Qwen3.8 Flash is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons