Undominated.ai

Model comparison · accepted catalogue facts 2026-10-21

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Gemini 3.6 Flash

A quality score or a computable price is missing. This pair has no better-and-cheaper verdict.

Editorial comparison: Cross-provider head-to-head: Gemini 3.6 Flash (Google) vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (DeepSeek) on intelligence, speed, and pricing Inclusion does not recommend either model.

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash

LMArena general · Elo · higher is better

Scale starts at 1040 Elo

1462.5

Balanced effective USD / 1M tokens · lower is better

$0.182/M

Price under confirmation since Oct 12, 2026
Gemini 3.6 Flash

LMArena general · Elo · higher is better

Scale starts at 1040 Elo

1479.5

Balanced effective USD / 1M tokens · lower is better

Unknown

In-Depth Analysis

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Gemini 3.6 Flash: Measured Technical Breakdown

Comprehensive comparison across measured human-preference evaluation, effective production token costs, architectural limits, and migration trade-offs.

Measured Capability (LMArena)
Gemini 3.6 Flash leads by 17.0 Elo

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 1462.5 ±6.29 · Gemini 3.6 Flash: 1479.5 ±4.4 Statistically significant preference separation

Cost Comparison Across Canonical Production Workloads

Rates represent effective cost per 1M tokens under standard token blends. Cached prompt reads are factored according to workload context reuse.

Workload & RatioDeepSeek V4.1 FlashGemini 3.6 FlashCost DifferenceAdvantage
Balanced 3 tokens in per 1 out$0.182 /1M tokensSeparately billed reasoning tokens are not part of this token blend.—Custom quote needed
Summarise Huge input, tiny output$0.067 /1M tokensSeparately billed reasoning tokens are not part of this token blend.—Custom quote needed
Chat Long cached system prompt$0.247 /1M tokensSeparately billed reasoning tokens are not part of this token blend.—Custom quote needed
Code gen Output dominates$0.360 /1M tokensSeparately billed reasoning tokens are not part of this token blend.—Custom quote needed
Agentic Context replayed each turn$0.105 /1M tokensSeparately billed reasoning tokens are not part of this token blend.—Custom quote needed

Architectural & Operational Specifications

SpecificationDeepSeek V4.1 FlashGemini 3.6 FlashOperational Note
Context window1,048,576 tokens1,048,576 tokens—
Max output generation943,718 tokens65,536 tokensDeepSeek V4.1 Flash allows longer single-turn completions
Base input price$0.053 / 1M tokens$0.750 / 1M tokensDeepSeek V4.1 Flash input rate is cheaper
Base output price$0.570 / 1M tokens$3.75 / 1M tokensDeepSeek V4.1 Flash output rate is cheaper
Cached input price$0.010 / 1M tokens$0.075 / 1M tokensDeepSeek V4.1 Flash offers lower cached prompt cost
Reasoning & thinking tokensSupported; standard ratesSupported; separately billed at $3.75/1M—
Input modalitiestext, imagetext, image, video, file, audio—
Tool calling / function useSupportedSupported—
Open weights & licenceProprietary (API-only)Proprietary (proprietary)Gemini 3.6 Flash allows independent hosting or local deployment
Provider & reseller marketDeepSeek · 31 provider offers (11.19× spread)Google · 7 provider offers—

When to Choose DeepSeek V4.1 Flash

  • Higher maximum completion limit (943,718 tokens).
  • Direct integration with DeepSeek tooling and API features.
Risks when moving from Gemini 3.6 Flash → DeepSeek V4.1 Flash:
  • video input is not supported by the candidate.
  • file input is not supported by the candidate.
  • audio input is not supported by the candidate.

When to Choose Gemini 3.6 Flash

  • Higher measured general capability (1479.5 Elo on human evaluation).
  • Broader multimodal input support: text, image, video, file, audio.
  • Direct integration with Google tooling and API features.
Risks when moving from DeepSeek V4.1 Flash → Gemini 3.6 Flash:
  • Output limit: 943,718 → 65,536 tokens.

Detailed Evidence Passports & Independent Audits

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash Full model card, pricing ladder & provider offers → Gemini 3.6 Flash Full model card, pricing ladder & provider offers → Alternatives to DeepSeek V4.1 Flash Better-and-cheaper dominance audit → Alternatives to Gemini 3.6 Flash Better-and-cheaper dominance audit →

Compare · model decision

Choose two or three models

Inspect the differences, estimate your workload and keep the evidence. All standard catalogue models are available, including unrated ones.

Catalogue facts
2026-10-21

2 / 3 selected · 0 requirements
Open public comparison link
Public workload and requirements

These settings are included in the share link. The fixed-request scenario and private evaluation data below are excluded.

A ↔ B

A quality score or a computable price is missing. This pair has no better-and-cheaper verdict.

Estimated blend: 75% input, 25% output; 0% cached input. Base context tier. Prompt length selects the billing tier. An unlisted cache-read rate uses that tier’s full input rate in this blend; missing required input or output rates prevent an estimate. The fixed-request estimate below validates actual context and output limits and requires a published cache-read rate when cache hits are assumed.

What changes between these models

Quality first, then estimated price. LMArena scores are human-preference measurements, not a benchmark of your application. A missing score is unrated.

  • DeepSeek V4.1 Flash · Meets the stated model requirements
  • Gemini 3.6 Flash · Meets the stated model requirements
Material differences and unknown evidence. Deltas compare each model with model A. Unknown facts remain visible.
Measured factA DeepSeek V4.1 FlashB Gemini 3.6 Flash
LMArena general score (Elo)1,462.51,479.5Δ vs A: +17 Elo
Score interval half-width (± Elo)6.294.4Δ vs A: -1.89 Elo
Benchmark reasoning effortmaxhigh
LMArena document score (Elo)Unknown1,456.1
Estimated effective USD / 1M tokens$0.18225Unknown
Base input USD / 1M tokens$0.053$0.75Δ vs A: +0.697 USD/M
Base output USD / 1M tokens$0.57$3.75Δ vs A: +3.18 USD/M
Base cached-input USD / 1M tokens$0.01$0.075Δ vs A: +0.065 USD/M
Price statusUnder confirmation since 2026-10-12As of the catalogue date
Output limit (tokens)943,71865,536Δ vs A: -878,182 tokens
Input modalitiestext, imagetext, image, video, file, audio
Open weightsUnknownNot supported
Recorded licenceUnknownproprietary
Model providerDeepSeekGoogle
Distinct sellers in the catalogue291Δ vs A: -28
Serving precision differs across offersSupportedNot supportedΔ vs A: -1
Recorded retirement dateUnknownUnknown
4 shared measured facts
Shared measured facts. Deltas compare each model with model A. Unknown facts remain visible.
Measured factA DeepSeek V4.1 FlashB Gemini 3.6 Flash
Context window (tokens)1,048,5761,048,576Δ vs A: 0 tokens
Tool useSupportedSupportedΔ vs A: 0
ReasoningSupportedSupportedΔ vs A: 0
Retirement evidenceNone announced; not a guaranteeNone announced; not a guarantee

Provider counts and precision flags describe catalogue offers. They do not establish the precision, availability, region, tool behaviour or limits of your chosen endpoint. Open each model’s provider table before switching.

Complete price ladders and billing conditions

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash

Rates below are USD per 1M tokens. A threshold selects that whole input/output rate pair.

Input-token thresholdInputOutputCached input
Base, up to and including first threshold$0.053$0.57$0.01

Gemini 3.6 Flash

Estimate unavailable: Separately billed reasoning tokens are not part of this token blend.

Separate reasoning: $3.75/1M tokens; reasoning-token counts are not modelled here. Rates below are USD per 1M tokens. A threshold selects that whole input/output rate pair.

Input-token thresholdInputOutputCached input
Base, up to and including first threshold$0.75$3.75$0.075
Migration preflight · compare each candidate with model A

Keeping DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is a valid decision. No pairwise comparison certifies a drop-in replacement.

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash → Gemini 3.6 Flash

Known loss or failed requirement

  • Output limit: 943,718 → 65,536 tokens.
  • Provider endpoint, serving precision, availability and task success need your own verification. Catalogue model capabilities do not certify an endpoint.
Check alternatives to DeepSeek V4.1 Flash

Estimate a fixed request shape

Private to this tab unless you save locally or explicitly export private details. These are estimates, not observed invoices. Cross-model token counts and task success are assumptions.

0.1 extra attempts means 10 extra full attempts per 100 requests. Cache writes, tool charges, taxes and unlisted charges are excluded.

  • DeepSeek V4.1 FlashEstimated total: $0.391 1,000 full attempts · base rates
  • Gemini 3.6 FlashEstimated total: unknown Separately billed reasoning tokens are not part of this request shape.
Prompt and output sensitivity · sampled scenarios

Every point recalculates the entire request shape. Tier-boundary samples include one token below, at and above each threshold. Ordering between samples is not guaranteed. Lowest known cost excludes unknown estimates and is not a replacement recommendation.

Vary input; hold output, requests, cache and retries fixed.
Input tokensDeepSeek V4.1 FlashGemini 3.6 FlashCoverage
2,000$0.391Lowest knownunknownSeparately billed reasoning tokens are not part of this request shape.Incomplete
4,096$0.502088Lowest knownunknownSeparately billed reasoning tokens are not part of this request shape.Incomplete
32,768$2.021704Lowest knownunknownSeparately billed reasoning tokens are not part of this request shape.Incomplete
131,072$7.231816Lowest knownunknownSeparately billed reasoning tokens are not part of this request shape.Incomplete
Vary output; hold input, requests, cache and retries fixed.
Output tokensDeepSeek V4.1 FlashGemini 3.6 Flash
128$0.17896unknownSeparately billed reasoning tokens are not part of this request shape.
2,048$1.27336unknownSeparately billed reasoning tokens are not part of this request shape.
8,192$4.77544unknownSeparately billed reasoning tokens are not part of this request shape.

Bring your observed evaluation results

JSON is parsed locally. Prompts, filenames, individual responses and extra fields are not retained. Import only aggregate measurements for selected models. Task/version labels do not establish that two evaluations used the same dataset.

Expected format
[{"model":"provider/exact-model-id","task":"support-answer","version":"rubric-1","attempts":100,"successes":84,"costUsd":2.4,"latencyMs":950}]

Use the exact catalogue ID. Replace the example values with observed measurements. Omit costUsd or latencyMs when they are unknown. No public score is inferred from these observations.

Keep the decision and its evidence

A portable record retains selected facts, complete tier ladders, public requirements and the publication manifest. It also embeds the full permitted public catalogue to verify the input artifact checksum. Files are larger for this reason (up to 2 MB); local storage is limited to 12 records. Team review is local to this browser; there is no hosted collaboration.

Saving is opt-in and includes private review fields. Shared comparison links never include them. Version 1 Check references remain separate and are not overwritten or guessed into this format.

Saved local decisions · 0

No version 2 decision records are stored in this browser.

Questions this page answers

Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash a better-and-cheaper replacement for Gemini 3.6 Flash?

A quality score or a computable price is missing. This pair has no better-and-cheaper verdict.

Which model is higher rated: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Gemini 3.6 Flash?

Gemini 3.6 Flash scores higher on LMArena general (1479.5 ±4.4) compared to DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (1462.5 ±6.3), a margin of 17.0 Elo points. The measured confidence intervals do not overlap, demonstrating a statistically significant preference lead on human evaluations.

Which model is more cost-effective: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Gemini 3.6 Flash?

Gemini 3.6 Flash bills reasoning tokens separately. Direct pricing comparison requires evaluating your specific input/output prompt ratios and reasoning settings.

How do their context windows and generation limits compare?

Both DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and Gemini 3.6 Flash provide an identical 1,048,576-token context window. Maximum output generation limits are 943,718 tokens for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and 65,536 tokens for Gemini 3.6 Flash.

What capabilities are lost when switching between DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and Gemini 3.6 Flash?

Switching from DeepSeek V4.1 Flash to Gemini 3.6 Flash involves: Output limit: 943,718 → 65,536 tokens. Conversely, moving from Gemini 3.6 Flash to DeepSeek V4.1 Flash involves: video input is not supported by the candidate; file input is not supported by the candidate; audio input is not supported by the candidate. Run test suites on your specific prompt templates and tool declarations before cutting over production traffic.

Can DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Gemini 3.6 Flash be self-hosted or deployed privately?

Both DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and Gemini 3.6 Flash are proprietary cloud models offered via managed API endpoints. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is served by DeepSeek and 31 catalogue offers, while Gemini 3.6 Flash is served by Google and 7 catalogue offers.

What is included in this comparison?

Accepted model capabilities, context and output limits, complete price-tier ladders, independent LMArena measurements and missing evidence. Provider endpoint precision and application success still need verification.

Can I compare a different workload or keep a decision record?

Yes. Change the public workload, prompt length and requirements in the comparison workspace. Fixed-request scenarios, aggregate evaluations and review notes stay local unless explicitly exported.

Evidence & Ask
Markdown for LLMs