DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashvsQwen3.8-27B
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash | Qwen3.8-27B | |
|---|---|---|
| Specifications | ||
ParametersA rough measure of how big the model is. More parameters usually means more capable and more expensive to run, though it is a poor guide on its own — a smaller, newer model often beats a larger, older one. | — | 27B |
Context windowHow much text the model can hold in mind at once — your question, any documents you attach, the conversation so far, and its own reply. Go past it and the earliest part falls out of view. | — | 262k |
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins | ||
Cheapest inputLowest input rate across third-party providers, excluding the lab itself. The cheapest endpoint may run a quantised build or a shorter context — see "Available from" on the model page. | — | $0.15Darkbloom |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across third-party providers, excluding the lab itself. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | — | $2.00Darkbloom |
| Benchmarks | ||
DeepSWE 1.1Agentic coding — Artificial Analysis' independent test of deep, agentic software-engineering work — the AI has to plan and carry out substantial coding tasks end to end. (Version 1.1 of the test.) Higher is better. | 74.2% | 42.2% |
NL2Repo-BenchRepo-level code generation — Tests whether the AI can turn a natural-language requirement into working code across an entire repository, not just produce a single function or patch. Higher is better. | 65.4% | 42.3% |
Terminal-Bench 2.1Agentic terminal coding — Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Higher is better. | 90.6% | 73% |
Humanity's Last Exam · no toolsMultidisciplinary reasoning — Humanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects, written so you can't just look up the answer. “No tools” means the AI answers on its own. Higher is better. | 36.8% | 30.8% |
Humanity's Last Exam · with toolsMultidisciplinary reasoning — Humanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects. “With tools” means the AI is allowed to search the web or run code while answering. Higher is better. | 63.9% | 30.8% |
GPQA DiamondScience — Graduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 90.9% | 89.2% |
Agent's Last Exam · pass@1Agentic computer use — A hard set of desktop and operating-system tasks an AI agent has to finish by looking at the screen and working the machine itself. The score is the share it passes outright — partial credit does not count. Higher is better. | 31.8% | 20.4% |
| BenchmarksPublished by one model only | ||
BullshitBench v2Nonsense detection — Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | — | 78% |
SWE-Bench ProAgentic coding — Can the AI fix real bugs in real software? It's handed actual problems from open-source projects and has to write code that genuinely solves them. Higher is better. | — | 61.7% |
QwenSWEBenchSoftware engineering — Qwen's in-house coding benchmark for evaluating a model's ability to complete software-engineering work. Higher is better. | — | 79% |
LiveCodeBenchCompetitive coding — Coding problems published so recently the AI can't have seen them in training — a contamination-free test of raw programming skill. Higher is better. | — | 90.3% |
Terminal-Bench 4.0Agentic terminal coding — Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Version 4.0 recalibrated how much time, CPU and memory each task gets, removed eight tasks and fixed nineteen, so fewer runs fail for reasons that have nothing to do with the model. Scores are not comparable with earlier versions. Higher is better. | 31.2% | — |
Terminal-Bench 3.0Agentic terminal coding — command-line task completion (v3.0, much harder task set) | 30% | — |
JobBenchProfessional tool use — Tests the AI on professional workplace tasks that require using real work tools — the kind of multi-step jobs an office worker handles. Higher is better. | — | 33.4% |
CoWorkBenchLong-horizon office work — Tests long-running office tasks across fields including computer science, finance, law, medicine, and other productivity work. Higher is better. | — | 70.7% |
CyberGymCybersecurity — Tests the AI on cybersecurity challenges — finding and exploiting software weaknesses inside a safe sandbox. Higher is better. | 88.1% | — |
IFBenchInstruction following — Tests whether the AI can follow detailed instructions and satisfy multiple constraints at once. Higher is better. | — | 79.5% |
OSWorld-VerifiedAgentic computer use — Can the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Higher is better. | — | 84.3% |
Agent's Last Exam · scoreAgentic computer use — The graded score on the same desktop and operating-system tasks in Agent's Last Exam, giving partial credit for progress beyond the strict pass-or-fail result. Higher is better. | — | 42.9% |
AutomationBenchBusiness workflows — Tests whether the AI can run real multi-step business workflows — the kind of end-to-end office processes companies want to automate — from start to finish. Higher is better. | 54.8% | — |
Chartography · with toolsChart tasks — A chart-centred test run with tools available to the AI, reported separately from the chart-reading benchmarks above it. Higher is better. | 78.9% | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | DeepSeek | Qwen |
| Release date | Sep 10 2026 | Aug 14 2026 |
| Access | Proprietary | Open Weight |
Other comparisons
DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashvsClaude Fable 5.1Qwen3.8-27BvsClaude Fable 5.1DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashvsGPT-6 AstraQwen3.8-27BvsGPT-6 AstraDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashvsGemini 3.8 FlashQwen3.8-27BvsGemini 3.8 FlashDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashvsMuse Spark 1.3Qwen3.8-27BvsMuse Spark 1.3DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashvsGrok 4.6Qwen3.8-27BvsGrok 4.6DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashvsMistral Medium 3.5Qwen3.8-27BvsMistral Medium 3.5
Frequently asked questions
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash leads Qwen3.8-27B on 7 of the 7 benchmarks they both report. Qwen3.8-27B shipped 27 days before DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash is proprietary, while Qwen3.8-27B is open weight.
On DeepSWE 1.1, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash leads at 74.2% vs Qwen3.8-27B at 42.2%. On NL2Repo-Bench, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash leads at 65.4% vs Qwen3.8-27B at 42.3%. On Terminal-Bench 2.1, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash leads at 90.6% vs Qwen3.8-27B at 73%. On Humanity's Last Exam · no tools, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash leads at 36.8% vs Qwen3.8-27B at 30.8%. On Humanity's Last Exam · with tools, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash leads at 63.9% vs Qwen3.8-27B at 30.8%. On GPQA Diamond, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash leads at 90.9% vs Qwen3.8-27B at 89.2%. On Agent's Last Exam · pass@1, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash leads at 31.8% vs Qwen3.8-27B at 20.4%.