DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 is a DeepSeek open-weights reasoning model, released 17 Oct 2026. Its best configuration (max reasoning effort) ranks #72 of 775 on the BenchLeader Index at 63.1 ±6.8, in the upper half. The ± is the point: 207 other configurations score within that range, so they and this one cannot be told apart on quality alone — price and speed are what separate them. It scores highest in reasoning (81) and lowest in knowledge (64). At $0.525 per million tokens blended it is mid-priced. Output speed of 209 tokens per second puts it in the fastest quarter, with a first answer in 10.7 s. It has been measured at 2 reasoning-effort settings; this summary describes the best-scoring one, and the tabs above switch between them. Last measured 17 Oct 2026.
- Blended price
- $0.525/M
- $0.300 in · $1.20 out
- Output speed
- 209 tok/s
- measured by Artificial Analysis
- First answer
- 11 s
- first token 0.86 s
- Context
- 1.0M
- Full answer
- 13 s
- median, reasoning included
- Cost per run
- $0.262
- one full Intelligence Index run
- Released
- 17 Oct 2026
- Overall index63
- Reasoning81
- Knowledge64
- Multimodal64
- Long context67
- Composite80
Versions
DeepSeek has shipped 2 models under this name. Each is ranked on its own results; a newer version often has fewer results so far, which holds its index nearer the average until more arrive.
| Model | Released | Index | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| NewDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017maxthis page | 17 Oct 2026 | 63.1 | #72 |
| DeepSeek V4.1 Flashmax | 10 Sept 2026 | 62.0 | #90 |
Reasoning-effort configurations
The same model behaves differently depending on how much it is allowed to think. Each row is one setting, scored only on the benchmarks that were run at that setting. “Not stated” collects results from publishers that did not say which setting they used; for a reasoning model that is usually its thinking mode, but we do not assume it. Pick a setting here or at the top of the page to see its price, speed and category scores.
| Effort | Index | Rank | Speed | First answer | Chat reply cost | Categories |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| maxbest | 63.1 | #72 | 209 tok/s | 11 s | $0.0005 | Composite 80 · Knowledge 64 · Long context 67 · Multimodal 64 · Reasoning 81 |
| not stated | – | – | 60 tok/s | 0.86 s | $0.0005 | Composite 63 |
Benchmark results
See all LLM benchmarks. One column per reasoning effort. Rank is among every configuration of every model on that benchmark. Hover a score for the run it came from.
Reasoning
| Benchmark | max | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench 2.0 Reasoningnot in indexeffort not stated | – | 89.1%#19 | LiveBench | |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA)not in index | 43.3%#58 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| CritPt | 24.0%#48 | – | Artificial Analysis |
Coding
| Benchmark | max | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench 2.0 Codingnot in indexeffort not stated | – | 96.0%#4 | LiveBench | |
| SciCode (AA)not in index | 55.9%#42 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Code Migrationnot in index | 44.2%#24 | – | Vals AI | |
| Vibe Code Bench v1.1not in index | 87.7%#11 | – | Vals AI | |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA)not in index | 33.8%#37 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| FrontierCode 1.1 (AA)not in index | 43.7%#14 | – | Artificial Analysis |
Agents & tools
| Benchmark | max | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Long Agenticnot in indexeffort not stated | – | 50.9%#12 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench Browsernot in indexeffort not stated | – | 76.0%#19 | LiveBench | |
| GDPval-AA v2.1not in index | 62.3%#7 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Finance Agent v2not in index | 57.0%#17 | – | Vals AI | |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmarknot in index | 14.2%#7 | – | Vals AI | |
| Legal Research Benchnot in index | 45.2%#17 | – | Vals AI | |
| Tax Agent Benchnot in index | 44.4%#5 | – | Vals AI | |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals)not in index | 31.8%#17 | – | Vals AI | |
| AutomationBenchnot in index | 66.6%#12 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| GDP.pdf (AA)not in index | 17.2%#82 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| AA-Briefcase v1.1not in index | 1570#18 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA)not in index | 12.9%#22 | – | Artificial Analysis |
Knowledge
| Benchmark | max | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench 2.0 Data Analysisnot in indexeffort not stated | – | 79.5%#12 | LiveBench | |
| LiveBench Researchnot in indexeffort not stated | – | 79.5%#18 | LiveBench | |
| AA-Omniscience | 4.7#108 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Excel Modeling Benchmarknot in index | 61.8%#32 | – | Vals AI | |
| AA-Omniscience: accuracynot in index | 42.9%#103 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| AA-Omniscience: non-hallucinationnot in index | 33.3%#200 | – | Artificial Analysis |
Multimodal
| Benchmark | max | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Designnot in indexeffort not stated | – | 83.4%#4 | LiveBench | |
| MMMU-Pro | 80.6%#44 | – | Artificial Analysis |
Long context
| Benchmark | max | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-LCR | 82.7%#35 | Artificial Analysis |
Composite
| Benchmark | max | not stated | Source | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench 2.0effort not stated | – | 79.2%#10 | LiveBench | |
| AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2 | 45.1#36 | – | Artificial Analysis | |
| Vals Indexnot in index | 61.3#8 | – | Vals AI |
Where to run it
Every provider serving this model through OpenRouter, with throughput and first-token latency measured on live traffic over the last 30 minutes and each provider’s own price. Purple marks the best in each column.
| Provider | Speed | First token | Input $/M | Output $/M | Context | Quantisation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseten | 228 tok/s | 0.37 s | $0.300 | $1.20 | 1.0M | – |
| Together | 227 tok/s | 0.23 s | $0.300 | $1.20 | 1.0M | – |
| Wafer | 141 tok/s | 0.61 s | $0.160 | $0.500 | 1.0M | mxfp4 |
| inference.net | 124 tok/s | 0.53 s | $0.080 | $0.500 | 1.0M | fp8 |
| AtlasCloud | 121 tok/s | 1.06 s | $0.300 | $1.20 | 1.0M | fp8 |
| inference.net | 117 tok/s | 0.44 s | $0.080 | $0.500 | 1.0M | fp8 |
| Morph | 116 tok/s | 0.76 s | $0.172 | $0.600 | 1.0M | fp8 |
| Parasail | 114 tok/s | 0.80 s | $0.300 | $1.20 | 1.0M | fp8 |
| SiliconFlow | 111 tok/s | 1.50 s | $0.300 | $1.20 | 1.0M | fp8 |
| Prime Intellect | 103 tok/s | 1.49 s | $0.300 | $1.20 | 1.0M | – |
| GMICloud | 103 tok/s | 1.78 s | $0.300 | $1.20 | 1.0M | fp8 |
| Relace | 100 tok/s | 0.86 s | $0.070 | $0.500 | 1.0M | – |
| Fireworks | 98 tok/s | 1.85 s | $0.300 | $1.20 | 1.0M | – |
| Crusoe | 92 tok/s | 0.79 s | $0.290 | $1.20 | 1.0M | fp8 |
| DeepInfra | 77 tok/s | 0.58 s | $0.098 | $0.294 | 1.0M | fp8 |
| Decart | 77 tok/s | 1.63 s | $0.090 | $0.180 | 1.0M | fp4 |
| DeepInfra | 73 tok/s | 0.93 s | $0.147 | $0.441 | 1.0M | fp8 |
| DeepInfra | 67 tok/s | 1.95 s | $0.078 | $0.235 | 1.0M | fp8 |
| DeepSeek | 64 tok/s | 0.86 s | $0.150 | $0.600 | 1.0M | – |
| Alibaba Cloud Int. | 58 tok/s | 0.79 s | $0.330 | $1.32 | 1M | – |
| NovitaAI | 56 tok/s | 3.60 s | $0.300 | $1.20 | 1.0M | fp8 |
| Cloudflare | 47 tok/s | 6.05 s | $0.100 | $0.600 | 1.0M | – |
Price history
Listed price per 1M tokens over time, as recorded by OpenRouter for the provider with the longest history.
What a task costs
Estimates from list price, output speed and time to first answer for the best configuration. “With caching” assumes three-quarters of the input is served from the prompt cache at $0.006 per 1M. Reasoning tokens are not modelled.
| Workload | Tokens in / out | Cost | With caching | Time |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chat reply | 400 / 300 | $0.0005 | $0.0004 | 12.1 s |
| Summarize a 30-page report | 12,000 / 600 | $0.0043 | $0.0017 | 13.5 s |
| Code edit | 6,000 / 1,500 | $0.0036 | $0.0023 | 17.8 s |
| Agentic coding session | 60,000 / 4,000 | $0.023 | $0.0096 | 29.8 s |
| Structured extraction | 2,000 / 200 | $0.0008 | $0.0004 | 11.6 s |
More from DeepSeek
Compare DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 with…
- 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
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GPT-6 Astra
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Claude Fable 5.1
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GPT-6.1 Sol
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Claude Fable 5
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Claude Opus 5
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GPT-5.6 Sol
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Muse Wonder
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Muse Spark 1.3
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GPT-6 Sol
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GPT-5.5
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GPT-5.5 Pro
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Kimi K3
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GPT-5.4
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Muse Spark
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GPT-5.6 Terra
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Grok 4.6
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Grok 4.7
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GPT-5.3-Codex
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GLM 5.3
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Gemini 3.7 Flash
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GPT-5.4 Pro
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Claude Opus 4.7
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Claude Opus 4.8
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Qwen3.8 Max
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Muse Spark 1.2
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Muse Spark 1.1
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Claude Opus 4.6
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GLM 5.3 Flash
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GLM 5.2
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Qwen3.6 Max
See also
Data as of 21 Oct 2026. Compare these configurations.
Cite as: BenchLeader, “DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017: benchmarks, pricing, speed and rank”, https://www.benchleader.com/models/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017, data as of 21 Oct 2026.