LIVE
ANTHROPICOpus 4.7 benchmarks published2m ago
CLAUDEOK142ms
OPUS 4.7$15 / $75per Mtok
CHATGPTOK89ms
HACKERNEWSWhy has not AI improved design quality the way it improved dev speed?14m ago
MMLU-PROleader Opus 4.788.4
GEMINIDEGRADED312ms
MISTRALMistral Medium 3 released6m ago
GPT-4o$5 / $15per Mtok
ARXIVCompositional reasoning in LRMs22m ago
BEDROCKOK178ms
GEMINI 2.5$3.50 / $10.50per Mtok
THE VERGEFrontier Model Forum expansion announced38m ago
SWE-BENCHleader Claude Opus 4.772.1%
MISTRALOK104ms
ANTHROPICOpus 4.7 benchmarks published2m ago
CLAUDEOK142ms
OPUS 4.7$15 / $75per Mtok
CHATGPTOK89ms
HACKERNEWSWhy has not AI improved design quality the way it improved dev speed?14m ago
MMLU-PROleader Opus 4.788.4
GEMINIDEGRADED312ms
MISTRALMistral Medium 3 released6m ago
GPT-4o$5 / $15per Mtok
ARXIVCompositional reasoning in LRMs22m ago
BEDROCKOK178ms
GEMINI 2.5$3.50 / $10.50per Mtok
THE VERGEFrontier Model Forum expansion announced38m ago
SWE-BENCHleader Claude Opus 4.772.1%
MISTRALOK104ms

DeepSeek V4 Flash vs Gemini 2.0 Flash

Both Flash-tier models target the high-volume, low-cost segment. Gemini 2.0 Flash wins on raw API price ($0.10 input vs $0.14 input) and adds multimodal video. DeepSeek V4 Flash is open-weight (MIT license), self-hostable, and edges Gemini Flash on most benchmarks especially math and code. The choice is mostly about whether you need closed multimodal or open weights.

Head-to-Head Specs

SpecDeepSeek V4 FlashGemini 2.0 Flash
ProviderDeepSeekGoogle
Input Price$0.14/1M$0.10/1M
Output Price$0.28/1M$0.40/1M
Context Window1M1M
Released2026-042025-02
Capabilitiestext, vision, codetext, vision, tool-use, code

Benchmark Scores

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 FlashGemini 2.0 FlashWinner
MMLU-Pro85.284.5DeepSeek
HumanEval89.487.6DeepSeek
GPQA Diamond58.754.8DeepSeek
MATH82.177.2DeepSeek
SWE-bench48.943.1DeepSeek

See the full benchmark leaderboard for all models.

Category Breakdown

General reasoning (MMLU-Pro)DeepSeek V4 Flash

V4 Flash at 85.2 vs Gemini Flash at 84.5

Code generation (HumanEval)DeepSeek V4 Flash

V4 Flash at 89.4 vs Gemini Flash at 87.6

SWE-benchDeepSeek V4 Flash

V4 Flash at 48.9 vs Gemini Flash at 43.1

MathDeepSeek V4 Flash

V4 Flash at 82.1 vs Gemini Flash at 77.2

PricingGemini 2.0 Flash

Gemini Flash at $0.10/$0.40 vs V4 Flash at $0.14/$0.28. Cheaper input, more expensive output.

LicenseDeepSeek V4 Flash

V4 Flash is MIT open weights; Gemini Flash is closed API.

MultimodalGemini 2.0 Flash

Gemini Flash supports text, image, audio, video. V4 Flash is text-only.

Context windowTieTie

Both ship 1M token context.

Choose DeepSeek V4 Flash when:

  • Open-weight self-hosting requirements
  • Code and math workloads at budget price
  • Workloads where output tokens dominate cost
  • Fine-tuning and adapter workflows
View DeepSeek V4 Flash details

Choose Gemini 2.0 Flash when:

  • Multimodal applications with audio or video
  • High input-token volume (cheaper per input token)
  • Closed-API simplicity over self-hosting overhead
  • Workloads on Google Cloud / Vertex AI
View Gemini 2.0 Flash details

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Flash or Gemini 2.0 Flash?

It depends on your use case. DeepSeek V4 Flash from DeepSeek excels at open-weight self-hosting requirements, while Gemini 2.0 Flash from Google is better for multimodal applications with audio or video. See the full comparison above for detailed benchmarks and pricing.

How much does DeepSeek V4 Flash cost compared to Gemini 2.0 Flash?

DeepSeek V4 Flash costs $0.14 input and $0.28 output per 1M tokens. Gemini 2.0 Flash costs $0.10 input and $0.40 output per 1M tokens.

What is the context window difference between DeepSeek V4 Flash and Gemini 2.0 Flash?

DeepSeek V4 Flash supports 1M tokens, while Gemini 2.0 Flash supports 1M tokens.

More Comparisons

Interactive Compare ToolAll ModelsFull Pricing Guide