DeepSeek V4 Pro 0423

deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro-20260423

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0423 is a text-to-text model with a context length of 1,048,576 tokens. It supports tool use and reasoning, and is an open-weight model. Pricing is $0.96 per million input tokens and $1.91 per million output tokens.

  • tool use
  • structured outputs
  • reasoning
  • open-weight

At a glance

providerdeepseek
releasedApr 23, 2026
context1.0M
input / M$0.96

Specifications

What the API gives you

Context window
1.0M tokens
Max output
384K tokens
Input price
$0.96 / 1M tokens
Output price
$1.91 / 1M tokens
Cache read
$0.080 / 1M tokens
Modalities
text → text
Knowledge cutoff
—
Released
Apr 23, 2026

Measured evidence

Public benchmark record

Design Arena Coding
1241 Elo2026-10-20
Design Arena Full-stack Agent
948 Elo2026-10-14
Design Arena UI
1223 Elo2026-10-20
Design Arena Web-app Agent
1000 Elo2026-10-20
Design Arena Website
1236 Elo2026-10-20
FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (Epoch AI)‡
45.3% ± 32026-06-17max effort, evaluated 2026-06-17
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI)‡
90.9% ± 22026-08-06high effort, evaluated 2026-08-06
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI)‡
89.6% ± 1.72026-06-16max effort, evaluated 2026-06-16
LiveBench Agentic Coding
42.6%2026-10-18
LiveBench Coding
70.0%2026-10-18
LiveBench Data Analysis
74.5%2026-10-18
LiveBench Instruction Following
62.4%2026-10-18
LiveBench Language
78.1%2026-10-18
LiveBench Math
90.7%2026-10-18
LiveBench Reasoning
82.7%2026-10-18
LMArena Creative Writing
1446 Elo2026-10-15
LMArena Instruction Following
1445 Elo2026-10-15
LMArena Long Query
1457 Elo2026-10-15
LMArena Math
1443 Elo2026-10-15
LMArena Text
1458 Elo2026-10-15
LMArena Text Factuality
1455 Elo2026-10-15
LMArena WebDev
1447 Elo2026-10-19
OTIS Mock AIME (Epoch AI)‡
95.6% ± 3.12026-08-06high effort, evaluated 2026-08-06
OTIS Mock AIME (Epoch AI)‡
96.7% ± 22026-06-17max effort, evaluated 2026-06-17
SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI)‡
47% ± 1.62026-08-27max effort, evaluated 2026-08-27

LMArena data licensed CC-BY-4.0. Aider (Apache-2.0) and SWE-bench (MIT) are open. Design Arena uses blind human preference. ‡ Submitted scaffold plus model result. Compare the harness and effort settings, not only the model name.

Open-weight model on Hugging Face.

Task evidence

How broad is the support?

Each status is exact to this model version and the selected task. Official release claims remain provisional.

  • Best LLM for Competition MathEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 4 independent sources. 6 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Business WritingEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Logic & Problem SolvingEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 3 independent sources. 5 of 5 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Marketing CopyEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Chat & RoleplayEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Creative WritingEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

Show all 35 tasks
  • Best LLM for WritingEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Roleplay & CharacterEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Math & ReasoningEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 5 independent sources. 7 of 7 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for a General AssistantEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 3 independent sources. 6 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Frontend & UIEstablished evidence

    91% of intended weighted task evidence across 3 independent sources. 6 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Code CompletionEstablished evidence

    79% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 3 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best Open-Weight LLM for Self-HostingEstablished evidence

    64% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Fast SummariesEstablished evidence

    58% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best Value LLMEstablished evidence

    58% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for CodingEstablished evidence

    53% of intended weighted task evidence across 3 independent sources. 7 of 7 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Literary TranslationEstablished evidence

    50% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 3 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Everyday TranslationEstablished evidence

    50% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 3 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for TranslationEstablished evidence

    50% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 3 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best Local LLM for CodingEstablished evidence

    47% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Document SummarizationEstablished evidence

    40% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 5 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for SummarizationEstablished evidence

    40% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 5 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best Cheap LLM for High VolumeEstablished evidence

    40% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Cheapest Capable LLMEstablished evidence

    40% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Agentic CodingEstablished evidence

    36% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 7 of 7 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for JSON & Schema OutputEstablished evidence

    35% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 3 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Structured Data ExtractionEstablished evidence

    35% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 3 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Debugging & Code ReviewEstablished evidence

    33% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 5 of 5 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Grounded RAGEstablished evidence

    29% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 5 of 7 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for RAG & Long ContextProvisional evidence

    22% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from FACTS Grounding or LMArena Document. 5 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for High-Volume ExtractionProvisional evidence

    21% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Route reliability or Structured-output eval. 1 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Massive ContextProvisional evidence

    20% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from LMArena Document or LongBench v2. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Autonomous AgentsProvisional evidence

    13% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from LMArena Agent or LMArena Agent Task Outcome. 6 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Image UnderstandingProvisional evidence

    11% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from LMArena Vision or VLMEvalKit tasks. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for AI AgentsProvisional evidence

    9% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Berkeley Function Calling or LMArena Agent. 9 of 9 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

Recommendation coverage

Where this model appears

Not currently included in a published recommendation. The task evidence panel above says exactly what is confirmed and what is still missing.

Catalog data via OpenRouter and models.dev. Last checked within the past 6 hours.