DeepSeek V4.1 Flash

deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash-20260910

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is a multimodal model from DeepSeek that accepts text and image inputs and generates text outputs. It supports a context length of 1,048,576 tokens, tool usage, and reasoning. The model is available as open weights and was released on September 10, 2026.

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

At a glance

providerdeepseek
releasedSep 10, 2026
context1.0M
input / M$0.020

Specifications

What the API gives you

Context window
1.0M tokens
Max output
944K tokens
Input price
$0.020 / 1M tokens
Output price
$1 / 1M tokens
Cache read
$0.015 / 1M tokens
Modalities
text, image → text
Knowledge cutoff
—
Released
Sep 10, 2026

Measured evidence

Public benchmark record

FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (Epoch AI)‡
67.4% ± 2.82026-10-08max effort, evaluated 2026-10-08
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI)‡
89.8% ± 1.72026-10-09max effort, evaluated 2026-10-09
LiveBench Agentic Coding
77.3%2026-10-18
LiveBench Coding
80.0%2026-10-18
LiveBench Data Analysis
79.3%2026-10-18
LiveBench Instruction Following
70.0%2026-10-18
LiveBench Language
81.2%2026-10-18
LiveBench Math
93.3%2026-10-18
LiveBench Reasoning
86.7%2026-10-18
LMArena Agent‡
2.32026-10-23max effort
LMArena Agent Bash Recovery‡
7.92026-10-08max effort
LMArena Agent Steerability‡
12026-10-23max effort
LMArena Agent Task Outcome‡
5.82026-10-23max effort
LMArena Agent Tool Hallucination‡
0.62026-10-23max effort
LMArena Creative Writing‡
1438 Elo2026-10-22max effort
LMArena Instruction Following‡
1474 Elo2026-10-22max effort
LMArena Long Query‡
1474 Elo2026-10-22max effort
LMArena Math‡
1479 Elo2026-10-22max effort
LMArena Text‡
1476 Elo2026-10-22max effort
LMArena Text Factuality‡
1469 Elo2026-10-22max effort
LMArena Vision‡
1261 Elo2026-10-19max effort
LMArena Vision Diagrams‡
1293 Elo2026-10-19max effort
LMArena Vision OCR‡
1272 Elo2026-10-19max effort
LMArena WebDev‡
1619 Elo2026-10-23max effort
LMArena WebDev Image-to-Web‡
1606 Elo2026-10-19max effort
OTIS Mock AIME (Epoch AI)‡
98.3% ± 0.62026-10-08max effort, evaluated 2026-10-08
SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI)‡
42.9% ± 1.62026-10-13max effort, evaluated 2026-10-13

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 45 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 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 Image UnderstandingEstablished evidence

    61% 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 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 Frontend & UIEstablished evidence

    45% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 6 of 6 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 CodingEstablished evidence

    38% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 7 of 7 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Autonomous AgentsEstablished evidence

    36% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 6 of 6 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 Agentic CodingEstablished evidence

    35% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 7 of 7 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for AI AgentsEstablished evidence

    34% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 9 of 9 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 OCR & DocumentsProvisional evidence

    45% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from LMArena Document or Structured-output eval. 3 of 5 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Charts & DiagramsProvisional evidence

    45% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from LMArena Document or Structured-output eval. 3 of 5 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Vision & DocumentsProvisional evidence

    40% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from LMArena Document or Structured-output eval. 4 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Tool & Function CallingProvisional evidence

    38% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Berkeley Function Calling or LMArena Search. 6 of 7 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Document ParsingProvisional evidence

    37% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from LMArena Document or Structured-output eval. 3 of 5 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Hermes AgentProvisional evidence

    29% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Berkeley Function Calling or SWE-rebench. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for OpenHandsProvisional evidence

    29% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Berkeley Function Calling or SWE-rebench. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for GooseProvisional evidence

    29% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Berkeley Function Calling or SWE-rebench. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for OpenClawProvisional evidence

    29% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Berkeley Function Calling or SWE-rebench. 4 of 4 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 Computer & Browser UseProvisional evidence

    17% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Berkeley Function Calling or OSWorld Verified. 3 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

Recommendation coverage

Where this model appears

  1. #1Cheapest Capable LLM
  2. #1Best Open-Weight LLM for Self-Hosting
  3. #1Best LLM for High-Volume Extraction
  4. #1Best LLM for JSON & Schema Output
  5. #1Best Cheap LLM for High Volume
  6. #1Best LLM for Structured Data Extraction
  7. #1Best Local LLM for Coding
  8. #1Best Value LLM
  9. #2Best LLM for Fast Summaries
  10. #4Best LLM for Code Completion
  11. #4Best LLM for Agentic Coding
  12. #6Best LLM for Autonomous Agents
  13. #6Best LLM for AI Agents
  14. #8Best LLM for Debugging & Code Review

Compare head to head

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