DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GPT-5.4 Pro
Full profiles: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (DeepSeek) and GPT-5.4 Pro (OpenAI): every benchmark, price and rank.
Updated · Data from 8 sources
As of 25 Oct 2026, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (max) and GPT-5.4 Pro are neck and neck on quality (64.0 vs 63.3 on the BenchLeader Index, inside the ±5.2 margin of error), and DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (max) costs 129× less, which makes it the better buy for most workloads. GPT-5.4 Pro leads in every category we measure both in.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 benchmarks max DeepSeek
GPT-5.4 Pro benchmarks OpenAIOpen in the comparison toolWhich to pick for…
The pick's numbers come first. Category scores on the BenchLeader scale (50 is the average model, 15 points one standard deviation). High confidence means a lead of half a standard deviation or more; under one point is called either.
| Use case | Pick | Why | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reasoning | GPT-5.4 Pro | 73 vs 71 category score | Medium |
| Knowledge | GPT-5.4 Pro | 74 vs 57 category score | High |
| Images and other media | GPT-5.4 Pro | 70 vs 64 category score | Medium |
| Lowest cost | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 | $0.525 vs $67.50 per 1M blended; agentic coding session $0.023 vs $2.52 | – |
| Fastest first answer | GPT-5.4 Pro | 6.1 s (GPT-5.4 Pro) vs 11.4 s (DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (max)) to the first answer token | – |
| High volume on a budget | Neither flagship | A smaller model is usually the better fit: Cheapest good LLMs, Fastest LLMs | – |
Key differences
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (max) and GPT-5.4 Pro are neck and neck on quality (64.0 vs 63.3, within the ±5.2 margin).
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (max) is stronger in agents & tools, coding, composite, long context, maths.
- GPT-5.4 Pro is stronger in knowledge, multimodal, reasoning, instruction following.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (max) is 129× cheaper ($0.525 vs $67.50 per 1M blended).
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (max) streams 27.9× faster (195 vs 7 tokens per second).
At a glance
| Spec | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | DeepSeek | OpenAI |
| Released | 17 Oct 2026 | 4 Mar 2026 |
| Context window (tokens) | 1,048,576 | 1,050,000 |
| Compared at | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (max) | GPT-5.4 Pro |
| Open weights | Yes | No |
| Price in / out / cached input per 1M | $0.300 / $1.20 / $0.0060 | $30.00 / $180.00 / – |
Category by category
Category scores on the BenchLeader scale: 50 is the average evaluated model, 15 points is one standard deviation. A gap under one point is called level.
| Category | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (max) | GPT-5.4 Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reasoning | 70.6 | 72.5 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
| Coding | 69.9 | – | not comparable |
| Agents & tools | 63.5 | – | not comparable |
| Maths | 61.8 | – | not comparable |
| Knowledge | 57.1 | 73.6 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
| Instruction following | – | 63.8 | not comparable |
| Multimodal | 63.7 | 69.8 | GPT-5.4 Pro |
| Long context | 66.4 | – | not comparable |
| Composite | 80.0 | – | not comparable |
Where sources disagree
Across the 0 benchmarks both have, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 leads 0, GPT-5.4 Pro leads 0.
| Overall index | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (max) | GPT-5.4 Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 64.0 | 63.3 | neck and neck |
Each publisher runs its own tasks, harnesses and effort settings, so their overall verdicts can differ; BenchLeader reconciles them on one scale. † measured at another effort setting of the same model (the publisher did not test the one compared here).
Price, speed and latency
List prices blended at three input tokens per output token. Per-task prices use the token counts on the methodology page; suite cost is what Artificial Analysis paid to run its whole Intelligence Index.
| Measure | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (max) | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Blended price per 1M tokens | $0.525 | $67.50 |
| Input / output per 1M | $0.300 / $1.20 | $30.00 / $180.00 |
| Cached input per 1M | $0.0060 | – |
| Price per task: chat reply | $0.0005 | $0.066 |
| Price per task: summarize a 30-page report | $0.0043 | $0.468 |
| Price per task: code edit | $0.0036 | $0.450 |
| Price per task: agentic coding session | $0.023 | $2.52 |
| Price per task: structured extraction | $0.0008 | $0.096 |
| Cost to run a full benchmark suite | $0.262 | – |
| Output speed | 195 tok/s | 7 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 11.4 s | 6.1 s |
| Time to a complete answer | 13.9 s | – |
Each model is compared at its best-ranked reasoning-effort setting. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (max) scores 64.0 and takes 11 s to its first answer token. GPT-5.4 Pro scores 63.3 and takes 6 s to its first answer token; GPT-5.4 Pro (xhigh) scores 61.9 in 6 s. Higher effort means more thinking before the answer: better scores, longer waits and more tokens billed. How reasoning effort changes scores and cost.
Every benchmark
66 benchmarks, grouped by category; each name links to the board and its leaders. † measured at another effort setting of the same model, shown for reference and not counted as a win.
| Metric | Publisher | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (max) | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | BenchLeader | 64.0 | 63.3 |
| Agents & tools score | BenchLeader | 63.5 | – |
| Coding score | BenchLeader | 69.9 | – |
| Composite score | BenchLeader | 80.0 | – |
| Knowledge score | BenchLeader | 57.1 | 73.6 |
| Long context score | BenchLeader | 66.4 | – |
| Maths score | BenchLeader | 61.8 | – |
| Multimodal score | BenchLeader | 63.7 | 69.8 |
| Reasoning score | BenchLeader | 70.6 | 72.5 |
| Instruction following score | BenchLeader | – | 63.8 |
| Blended price $/M | BenchLeader | $0.525 | $67.50 |
| Output speed | BenchLeader | 195 tok/s | 7 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | BenchLeader | 11.4 s | 6.1 s |
| Context window | BenchLeader | 1,048,576 tokens | 1,050,000 tokens |
| Reasoning | |||
| GPQA Diamond | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | 93.2% | 94.6%† |
| Humanity's Last Exam | Scale AI / CAIS | – | 44.3% |
| SimpleBench | SimpleBench | – | 74.1% |
| LiveBench 2.0 Reasoning | LiveBench | 89.1%† | – |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 43.3% | – |
| ARC-AGI-1 | ARC Prize | 93.5% | 94.5%† |
| ARC-AGI-2 | ARC Prize | 78.1% | 83.3%† |
| CritPt | Artificial Analysis | 24.0% | 30.0%† |
| Chess Puzzles | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | 46.0% | 59.0%† |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | 49.0% | – |
| Coding | |||
| WeirdML | WeirdML | – | 57.4%† |
| Arena WebDev | Arena (LMArena) | 1665 | – |
| LiveBench 2.0 Coding | LiveBench | 96.0%† | – |
| SciCode (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 55.9% | – |
| Code Migration | Vals AI | 44.2% | – |
| Code Migration v1.1 | Vals AI | 67.5% | – |
| Vibe Code Bench v1.1 | Vals AI | 87.7% | – |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 33.8% | – |
| FrontierCode 1.1 (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 43.7% | – |
| Agents & tools | |||
| LiveBench Long Agentic | LiveBench | 50.9%† | – |
| LiveBench Browser | LiveBench | 76.0%† | – |
| GDPval-AA v2.1 | Artificial Analysis | 62.3% | – |
| Finance Agent v2 | Vals AI | 57.0% | – |
| Finance Agent v2.1 | Vals AI | 62.9% | – |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1.1 | Vals AI | 14.2% | – |
Show all 66 benchmarks
| Metric | Publisher | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (max) | GPT-5.4 Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agents & tools | |||
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1 | Vals AI | 9.2% | – |
| Legal Research Bench | Vals AI | 45.2% | – |
| Tax Agent Bench | Vals AI | 44.4% | – |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals) | Vals AI | 31.8% | – |
| AutomationBench | Artificial Analysis | 66.6% | – |
| GDP.pdf (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 17.2% | – |
| AA-Briefcase v1.1 | Artificial Analysis | 1570 | – |
| Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 12.9% | – |
| CWE-Bench (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 69.2% | – |
| DeepSec-Bench (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 24.9% | – |
| CyberGym end-to-end (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 76.3% | – |
| Maths | |||
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | 71.2% | 82.5%† |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | 46.3% | 58.5%† |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | 99.4% | – |
| MathArena Apex | MathArena | – | 69.8%† |
| Knowledge | |||
| SimpleQA Verified | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | 42.5% | 46.3%† |
| LiveBench 2.0 Data Analysis | LiveBench | 79.5%† | – |
| LiveBench Research | LiveBench | 79.5%† | – |
| AA-Omniscience | Artificial Analysis | 4.7 | – |
| MultiNRC | Scale AI SEAL | – | 62.3% |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark | Vals AI | 61.8% | – |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark v1.1 | Vals AI | 69.2% | – |
| AA-Omniscience: accuracy | Artificial Analysis | 42.9% | – |
| AA-Omniscience: non-hallucination | Artificial Analysis | 33.3% | – |
| Instruction following | |||
| MultiChallenge | Scale AI SEAL | – | 69.2% |
| TutorBench | Scale AI SEAL | – | 56.6% |
| Multimodal | |||
| LiveBench Design | LiveBench | 83.4%† | – |
| MMMU-Pro | Artificial Analysis | 80.6% | – |
| VISTA | Scale AI SEAL | – | 53.9% |
| Long context | |||
| AA-LCR | Artificial Analysis | 82.7% | – |
| MLCR | Artificial Analysis | 26.7% | – |
| Composite | |||
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 159.6 |
| LiveBench 2.0 | LiveBench | 79.2%† | – |
| AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2 | Artificial Analysis | 45.1 | – |
| Vals Index | Vals AI | 61.3 | – |
| Vals Finance Index | Vals AI | 60.9% | – |
| Vals Router Index | Vals AI | 61.3%† | – |
| AA Cyber Index | Artificial Analysis | 56.8 | – |
| Safety & honesty | |||
| FORTRESS | Scale AI SEAL | – | 14.8% |
| MASK | Scale AI SEAL | – | 91.7% |
| Metadata | |||
| AA Openness Index | Artificial Analysis | 44.4 | – |
Data as of 2026-10-25. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
What changed
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (max): 10 new results (MLCR, AA Cyber Index, CWE-Bench (AA)…).
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (max): BenchLeader Index 63.1 → 63.9.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (max): 11 new results (GPQA Diamond, FrontierMath Tiers 1–3, FrontierMath Tier 4…).
- GPT-5.4 Pro: 1 score revision.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (max): 1 new result (FrontierCode 1.1 (AA)); 2 score revisions.
- GPT-5.4 Pro: BenchLeader Index 62.1 → 63.6.
- GPT-5.4 Pro: 1 new result (MultiNRC).
- GPT-5.4 Pro: BenchLeader Index 64.0 → 62.1.
- GPT-5.4 Pro: BenchLeader Index 63.4 → 64.0.
- GPT-5.4 Pro: 1 new result (TutorBench).
Related comparisons
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Claude Opus 5.5
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Gemini 4 Argon
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Muse Wonder Full
- GPT-5.4 Pro vs Claude Opus 5.5
- GPT-5.4 Pro vs Gemini 4 Argon
- GPT-5.4 Pro vs Muse Wonder Full
- GPT-5.4 Pro vs Claude Fable 5.1
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GPT-5.3-Codex
Rankings: Best LLM overall · Best LLM for agents · Best cheap LLMs
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GPT-5.4 Pro: questions
- Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 better than GPT-5.4 Pro?
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (max) and GPT-5.4 Pro are neck and neck on quality (64.0 vs 63.3, within the ±5.2 margin). The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; the two are within the margin of error as of 2026-10-25, so check the category scores for your use.
- Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 or GPT-5.4 Pro, and will that change?
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 is cheaper today: $0.525 against $67.50 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token. No price change has been announced for either.
- Which is better for long documents?
- Both take about 1.1M tokens: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 1,048,576, GPT-5.4 Pro 1,050,000.
- Which has lower latency?
- GPT-5.4 Pro answers first: 6.1 s against 11.4 s to the first answer token, as Artificial Analysis measures it. Reasoning effort drives most of this: a higher setting thinks longer before it answers.
- Which is faster, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 or GPT-5.4 Pro?
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 streams faster: 195 against 7 output tokens per second.
- When was DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 released?
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 was released on 17 Oct 2026.