Compare AI models: DeepSeek V3.2 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- DeepSeek V3.2DeepSeekHollow points use fallbacks · hover for details
- DeepSeek V4.1 FlashDeepSeek
ReasoningCodingCost efficiencyContext windowMultimodalTool use
| Model | Reasoning | Coding | Cost efficiency | Context window | Multimodal | Tool use |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DeepSeek V3.2 | 50/100 — Reasoning supported; no comparable benchmark | 50/100 — No data; neutral placeholder | 74/100 | 23/100 | 0/100 | 50/100 — Tool calling supported; no comparable benchmark |
| DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | 100/100 | 100/100 | 59/100 | 82/100 | 33/100 | 92/100 |
Overview
Author
Context length
128K
1M
Reasoning
True
True
Input modalities
Text
Text, Image
Output modalities
Text
Text
Providers
Pricing
Input
$0.22/ 1M
$0.30/ 1M
Output
$0.33/ 1M
$1.20/ 1M
Cached input
$0.06/ 1M
$0.006/ 1M
MomentumLast 2 mo
Unique users
0
2M
Completed sessions
1
39,077,114
Token share
0%
21.5%
Tokens
00%
213T+100%
No trend data
AUG 19OCT 13
RetentionWeek 1
Returning users
Pending
64.2%249K user-weeks
Related comparisons. Other model pairs to check.
Nearby alternativeDeepSeek V3.2 vs Jamba MiniDeepSeek V3.2·Jamba MiniNearby alternativeDeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Jamba MiniDeepSeek V4.1 Flash·Jamba MiniRelated comparisonDeepSeek V3.2 vs Jamba LargeDeepSeek V3.2·Jamba LargeRelated comparisonDeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Jamba LargeDeepSeek V4.1 Flash·Jamba Large