text model comparison
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs GPT-5.6 Luna
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash and GPT-5.6 Luna are both current text models, from DeepSeek and OpenAI. GPT-5.6 Luna is 33% cheaper per 1M input tokens than DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash, $0.20 vs $0.30. On Arena Text, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash scores 1475 Elo and GPT-5.6 Luna 1452 Elo (Arena, measured October 8, 2026). GPT-5.6 Luna has the larger context window, 1,050,000 vs 1,000,000 tokens.
Data verified October 12, 2026 · Dataset 2026-10-12
Side by side
Standard-tier prices in effect today. The better value in each row is highlighted.
| Fact | DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash | GPT-5.6 Luna |
|---|---|---|
| Price per 1M input tokens | $0.30 | $0.20 (better) |
| Price per 1M output tokens | $1.20 | $1.20 |
| Cost of 10M input and 2M output tokens | $5.40 | $4.40 (better) |
| Arena Text | 1475 Elo (#18 of 39) (better) | 1452 Elo (#29 of 39) |
| GPQA Diamond | 89.8% (#25 of 37) | 91.6% (#19 of 37) (better) |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2) | 67.4% (#22 of 37) | 82.1% (#12 of 37) (better) |
| SimpleQA Verified | Not measured | 41% (#26 of 34) |
| Provider | DeepSeek | OpenAI |
| Release date | September 10, 2026 | July 9, 2026 |
| Access | API and open weights | API only |
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens | 1,050,000 tokens |
| Max output | 384,000 tokens | 128,000 tokens |
| Input | text, image | text, image |
| Output | text | text |
When to choose each
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
Best for
- High-volume agent and multimodal workloads where per-token cost dominates
- Teams that want a frontier-adjacent model they can also self-host under MIT terms
Watch out for
- The recorded API rates are the peak-hour prices; DeepSeek charges half outside 01:00-04:00 and 06:00-10:00 UTC on weekdays
- Running the open weights moves cost to your own infrastructure, which the token rates here do not represent
GPT-5.6 Luna
Best for
- High-volume API evaluation with published low token prices
- Subagents and batch reasoning where cost per call dominates
Watch out for
- Not in the pinned LiveBench snapshot; its independent scores here come from Epoch AI's own GPQA Diamond, FrontierMath and SimpleQA Verified runs
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs GPT-5.6 Luna FAQ
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash or GPT-5.6 Luna?
GPT-5.6 Luna is 33% cheaper per 1M input tokens than DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash, $0.20 vs $0.30. For 10M input and 2M output tokens, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash costs $5.40 and GPT-5.6 Luna $4.40 at standard rates.
Which scores higher on independent benchmarks, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash or GPT-5.6 Luna?
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash leads on Arena Text, 1475 Elo to 1452 Elo; GPT-5.6 Luna leads on GPQA Diamond, 91.6% to 89.8%; GPT-5.6 Luna leads on FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2), 82.1% to 67.4%. Scores are independent evaluations, not either vendor's launch figures.
Which has the larger context window, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash or GPT-5.6 Luna?
GPT-5.6 Luna has the larger context window, 1,050,000 vs 1,000,000 tokens.
Can I run DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash or GPT-5.6 Luna myself?
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash is released as open weights you can run yourself; GPT-5.6 Luna is available through its provider's API only.
Related comparisons
- Claude Haiku 5.5 vs DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
- Claude Sonnet 5 vs DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
- DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite
- DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
- DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs Gemini 3.7 Flash
- DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs Gemini 3.8 Flash
- DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs Gemini 3 Flash Preview
- DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs GPT-4.1 mini
- DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs GPT-5.4
- DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs GPT-5.6 Terra
Production evaluation
Choosing between DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash and GPT-5.6 Luna?
Public benchmarks narrow the shortlist. We run both on your own tasks, data and cost limits, then build the routing and review controls to run the winner in production.
- A head-to-head evaluation on your real workload
- Routing between models by cost and difficulty