DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Pareto
Price, context window & benchmark comparison
VS
Compare different models
Verdict: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is 17.9× cheaper than Pareto on a typical 3:1 input/output mix. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has the larger context window (1M vs 262K).
| DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Pareto | |
|---|---|---|
| Input price / 1M | $0.14 | $2.50 |
| Output price / 1M | $0.42 | $7.50 |
| Blended price (3:1) | $0.21 | $3.75 |
| Cached input / 1M | $0.0042 | $0.25 |
| Context window | 1M | 262K |
| Max output | 131K | 131K |
| Intelligence index | 39.5 | — |
| Coding index | — | — |
| Providers | 26 | — |
| Best provider uptime (30m) | 100.0% | — |
| Vision input | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Released | 2026-09-10 | 2026-09-17 |
| Retirement | — | — |
Cost calculator
FAQ
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Pareto?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is 17.9× cheaper than Pareto on a typical 3:1 input/output mix.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Pareto: which has a bigger context window?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 1,048,576 tokens. Pareto: 262,144 tokens.
How much would 1 million requests cost?
At 2,000 input + 500 output tokens per request: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash ≈ $490.00, Pareto ≈ $8,750.
More comparisons
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM 5.3 PrimeDeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeDeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Command A+DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GPT-6 Luna ProDeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GPT-6 LunaDeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GPT-6 Sol ProDeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GPT-6 SolDeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Claude Opus 5.5DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeedDeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs MiMo-V2.6-FlashDeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Grok 4.7DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.8 Omni FlashDeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM 5.3 FlashXDeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GPT-6 AstraDeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GPT-6 Astra ProDeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.8 Max (0902)Pareto vs GLM 5.3 PrimePareto vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimePareto vs Command A+Pareto vs GPT-6 Luna ProPareto vs GPT-6 LunaPareto vs GPT-6 Sol ProPareto vs GPT-6 SolPareto vs Claude Opus 5.5