text model comparison
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs GPT-5.6 Sol
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash and GPT-5.6 Sol are both current text models, from DeepSeek and OpenAI. DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash is 93% cheaper per 1M input tokens than GPT-5.6 Sol, $0.30 vs $4. On Arena Text, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash scores 1476 Elo and GPT-5.6 Sol 1485 Elo (Arena, measured October 28, 2026). GPT-5.6 Sol has the larger context window, 1,050,000 vs 1,000,000 tokens.
- Higher Arena Text
- GPT-5.6 Sol1485 Elo against 1476 Elo
- Lower price per 1M input tokens
- DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash$0.30 against $4
- Longer context window
- GPT-5.6 Sol1.05M tokens against 1M tokens
- Newer release
- DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashSep 2026 against Jul 2026
Data verified November 3, 2026 · Dataset 2026-11-03
Side by side
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash and GPT-5.6 Sol, line by line
Prices in effect today, compared at the same tier wherever both list one. The better value in each row is highlighted.
| Fact | DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| Price | ||
| Price per 1M input tokens | $0.30 (better) | $4 |
| Price per 1M output tokens | $1.20 (better) | $20 |
| Independent benchmarks | ||
| Arena Text | 1476 Elo (#21 of 51) | 1485 Elo (#11 of 51) (better) |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2) | 71.2% (#23 of 42) | 89.1% (#7 of 42) (better) |
| GPQA Diamond | 93.2% (#16 of 41) | 93.5% (#12 of 41) (better) |
| SimpleQA Verified | 42.5% (#27 of 38) | 69.7% (#8 of 38) (better) |
| Arena WebDev | 1665 Elo (#12 of 45) | Not measured |
| Specs | ||
| 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 |
Charts
Against every current text model
Where DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash and GPT-5.6 Sol land among the current models of their task, on every independent benchmark, on price and on context.
Where each stands
On Arena Text, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash ranks #21 and GPT-5.6 Sol #11 of 51 current models. Each bar is the share of current models it beats: on score, price and context.
Independent benchmarks
Arena Text
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash:#21of 51
1,476 Elo · ahead of 58%
GPT-5.6 Sol:#11of 51
1,485 Elo · ahead of 80%
Arena WebDev
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash:#12of 45
1,665 Elo · ahead of 75%
GPT-5.6 Sol: Not scored
FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash:#23of 42
71.2% · ahead of 46%
GPT-5.6 Sol:#7of 42
89.1% · ahead of 85%
GPQA Diamond
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash:#16of 41
93.2% · ahead of 63%
GPT-5.6 Sol:#12of 41
93.5% · ahead of 73%
SimpleQA Verified
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash:#27of 38
42.5% · ahead of 30%
GPT-5.6 Sol:#8of 38
69.7% · ahead of 78%
Price and context
Price per 1M input tokens
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash:#11of 52
$0.30 · cheaper than 75%
GPT-5.6 Sol:#43of 52
$4 · cheaper than 14%
Price per 1M output tokens
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash:#10of 52
$1.20 · cheaper than 76%
GPT-5.6 Sol:#43of 52
$20 · cheaper than 14%
Context window
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash:#26of 64
1M tokens · longer than 22%
GPT-5.6 Sol:#1of 64
1.05M tokens · longer than 86%
Quality against price
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash scores 1,476 at $0.525; GPT-5.6 Sol scores 1,485 at $8 (blended price per 1M tokens). The line joins the current models no other beats on both price and Arena Text score; hover any point to name it.
Quality against price: the data
| Model | Provider | Blended price per 1M tokens | Arena Text (Elo) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gemini 4 Argon | $4 | 1,520 | |
| Claude Opus 5.5 | Anthropic | $8 | 1,509 |
| Muse Wonder | Meta | $8 | 1,507 |
| Claude Fable 5 | Anthropic | $20 | 1,504 |
| Claude Fable 5.1 | Anthropic | $20 | 1,504 |
| Gemini 3.8 Flash | $1.50 | 1,496 | |
| Muse Spark 1.3 | Meta | $2 | 1,495 |
| Claude Opus 5 | Anthropic | $10 | 1,492 |
| Kimi K3 | Moonshot Kimi | $6 | 1,488 |
| GPT-5.6 Sol | OpenAI | $8 | 1,485 |
| Gemini 3.6 Flash | $3 | 1,483 | |
| GPT-5.5 | OpenAI | $11 | 1,482 |
| Claude Opus 4.8 | Anthropic | $10 | 1,482 |
| Qwen3.8-Max | Alibaba Qwen | $3 | 1,482 |
| GPT-6.1 Sol | OpenAI | $4 | 1,481 |
| GLM-5.3 | Z.ai | $2.15 | 1,481 |
| MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Xiaomi MiMo | $0.54 | 1,480 |
| Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Anthropic | $4 | 1,477 |
| GLM-5.3-Flash | Z.ai | $0.24 | 1,477 |
| GPT-6 Astra | OpenAI | $20 | 1,476 |
| DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash | DeepSeek | $0.52 | 1,476 |
| GPT-5.4 | OpenAI | $5.63 | 1,475 |
| Gemini 3 Flash Preview | $1.13 | 1,473 | |
| Grok 4.20 | xAI | $1.56 | 1,472 |
| GPT-5.6 Terra | OpenAI | $4.50 | 1,467 |
| Grok 4.5 | xAI | $3 | 1,465 |
| DeepSeek-V4-Pro | DeepSeek | $1.98 | 1,465 |
| Claude Sonnet 5 | Anthropic | $4 | 1,462 |
| GPT-6 Sol | OpenAI | $4 | 1,458 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | $0.85 | 1,456 | |
| Grok 4.6 | xAI | $3 | 1,455 |
| GPT-5.6 Luna | OpenAI | $0.45 | 1,453 |
| MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Xiaomi MiMo | $0.18 | 1,448 |
| Step 5 Preview | StepFun | $1.43 | 1,448 |
| Grok 4.3 | xAI | $1.56 | 1,442 |
| GPT-6 Luna | OpenAI | $0.20 | 1,441 |
| Grok 4.7 | xAI | $3 | 1,441 |
| Mistral Large 4 | Mistral AI | $1.05 | 1,432 |
| Claude Haiku 5.5 | Anthropic | $0.20 | 1,425 |
| GPT-4.1 | OpenAI | $3.50 | 1,415 |
| Solar Pro 4 | Upstage | $0.52 | 1,388 |
| GPT-4.1 mini | OpenAI | $0.70 | 1,383 |
| GPT-4.1 nano | OpenAI | $0.18 | 1,322 |
Cost
What each costs
Example workloads at each provider's listed rates, then every other rate either one lists. The cheaper figure in each row is highlighted.
The same work, priced
For 10M input and 2M output tokens, GPT-5.6 Sol costs 15 times as much as DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash, at each provider's listed rates.
10M input and 2M output tokens
GPT-5.6 Sol costs 15× as much
- DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
- $5.40
- GPT-5.6 Sol
- $80
The same, with 9M of the input tokens cached
GPT-5.6 Sol costs 17× as much
- DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
- $2.75
- GPT-5.6 Sol
- $47.60
| Workload or rate | DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| Example workloads | ||
| 10M input and 2M output tokens | $5.40 (better) | $80 |
| The same, with 9M of the input tokens cached | $2.75 (better) | $47.60 |
| Other listed rates | ||
| 1M input tokens, cached | $0.006 (better) | $0.40 |
| 1M input tokens, off peak | $0.15 | Not listed |
| 1M output tokens, off peak | $0.60 | Not listed |
| 1M input tokens, off-peak, cached | $0.003 | Not listed |
Your own bill will differ. These figures use list prices and example workloads. The AI Model Cost Audit reviews your real usage, shortlists models that score as well for each task for less, and estimates the savings.
Launch price $100, regular price $150
Verdict
When to choose each
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
Where it leads
- Lower input and output prices, $0.30 and $1.20 vs $4 and $20 per 1M tokens
- Longer responses, up to 384,000 vs 128,000 output tokens
- Open weights you can run yourself
- Cheaper cached input, $0.006 vs $0.40 per 1M tokens
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
- Epoch AI and Arena WebDev scored build 1017, which the API serves; Arena Text has rated only the September build so far
GPT-5.6 Sol
Where it leads
- Higher Arena Text score, 1485 Elo vs 1476 Elo
- Higher FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2) score, 89.1% vs 71.2%
- Higher GPQA Diamond score, 93.5% vs 93.2%
- Higher SimpleQA Verified score, 69.7% vs 42.5%
- Larger context window 1,050,000 vs 1,000,000 tokens
Best for
- Frontier capability evaluations for complex API workflows
- Long-horizon coding and research agents that use computer use or MCP tools
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
From benchmark to production
Building on DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash or GPT-5.6 Sol?
Public scores rarely hold on your own data. We test both models on your real tasks, then build the agent or pipeline around the one that wins.
AI Model Cost AuditLaunch price $100, regular price $150What the audit includes
FAQ
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs GPT-5.6 Sol FAQ
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash or GPT-5.6 Sol?
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash is 93% cheaper per 1M input tokens than GPT-5.6 Sol, $0.30 vs $4. For 10M input and 2M output tokens, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash costs $5.40 and GPT-5.6 Sol $80 at standard rates.
Which is cheaper with prompt caching, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash or GPT-5.6 Sol?
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash charges $0.006 per 1M cached input tokens, 98% below its standard input rate, and GPT-5.6 Sol $0.40, 90% below. With 9M of 10M input tokens cached and 2M output tokens, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash costs $2.75 and GPT-5.6 Sol $47.60.
Which scores higher on independent benchmarks, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash or GPT-5.6 Sol?
GPT-5.6 Sol leads on Arena Text, 1485 Elo to 1476 Elo; GPT-5.6 Sol leads on FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2), 89.1% to 71.2%; GPT-5.6 Sol leads on GPQA Diamond, 93.5% to 93.2%. Scores are independent evaluations, not either vendor's launch figures.
Which has the larger context window, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash or GPT-5.6 Sol?
GPT-5.6 Sol has the larger context window, 1,050,000 vs 1,000,000 tokens. DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash returns up to 384,000 tokens per response, GPT-5.6 Sol 128,000.
Can I run DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash or GPT-5.6 Sol myself?
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash is released as open weights you can run yourself; GPT-5.6 Sol is available through its provider's API only.
Further reading
More on DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash and GPT-5.6 Sol
Articles on DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash and GPT-5.6 Sol
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017: What Changed and Why Chips FellOctober 19, 2026
- Claude Opus 5.5 Benchmarks: What the Chart Shows and HidesSeptember 23, 2026
- Fable 5.1 vs Opus 5 vs GPT-5.6: Which to UseSeptember 1, 2026
- Token Efficiency: OpenAI's Full-Stack BetAugust 25, 2026
- Kimi K3 vs Opus 5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol: which model should you use?July 31, 2026
- ChatGPT for Academic Researchers: GPT-5.6 Sol ProJuly 30, 2026
Related comparisons
- Claude Haiku 5.5 vs DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
- GPT-5.6 Sol vs GPT-6.1 Sol
- DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs GPT-6 Luna
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol
- DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs GPT-6 Sol
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol
- Claude Sonnet 5 vs DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
- GPT-5.6 Sol vs GPT-6 Luna
- DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs DeepSeek-V4-Pro
- GPT-5.6 Sol vs GPT-6 Sol
- DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs Gemini 3.7 Flash
- GPT-5.6 Sol vs GPT-6 Astra
Production evaluation
Choosing between DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash and GPT-5.6 Sol?
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