DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (1017) vs Gemini 3.8 Flash
Which one, when
Both are text-and-image reasoning models with tool use and roughly million-token context (1000000 for deepseek-v4.1-flash-1017, 1048576 for gemini-3.8-flash), so the split is cost and I/O shape: DeepSeek is $0.3 in and $1.2 out versus $0.75 and $3.75, making Gemini 2.5x the input and about 3.1x the output rate, and Gemini's cache reads cost $0.075 against DeepSeek's $0.006. Pick deepseek-v4.1-flash-1017 for cheap, cache-heavy work or long single responses, since its 393216 max output is 6x the 65536 cap. Pick gemini-3.8-flash when you need audio or video input, which DeepSeek does not accept.
Benchmarks
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (1017): the vendor has not published benchmark scores.
Vendor-published: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic ByteDance DeepSeek Google MiniMax Moonshot OpenAI Tencent Z.ai
Pricing
| DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (1017) | Gemini 3.8 Flash | Δ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / 1M tokens | $0.3 | $0.75 | 0.4× |
| Output / 1M tokens | $1.2 | $3.75 | 0.32× |
| Cache read / 1M tokens | $0.006 | $0.075 | 0.08× |
| Cache write | no separate charge | - | - |
Rates from the live catalogue at build time; each model page carries the current rate card.
Where they sit · input price per 1M tokens across all 79 chat models on this billing unit (log scale)
Capabilities
| DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (1017) | Gemini 3.8 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Tool calling | yes | yes |
| Thinking control | yes (vendor dial not published) | yes (vendor dial not published) |
| Structured output | - | yes |
| Prompt caching | implicit (automatic) | implicit + explicit |
| Cache lifetime | no fixed TTL (evicted when unused) | not published |
| Minimum cached prefix | not published | 4096 tokens |
Specs
| DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (1017) | Gemini 3.8 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Input modalities | text image | text image audio video |
| Output modalities | text | text |
| Released | 2026-10-17 | 2026-09-02 |
| Knowledge cutoff | - | 2026-03 |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| Max output | 393K | 66K |
Specs are transcribed from each vendor’s documentation; a row a vendor does not publish is left out rather than inferred. Full sources: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (1017) · Gemini 3.8 Flash
One prompt, both models, measured through the gateway
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (1017) passed · 3 sentences
Enabling reasoning caused each request to generate additional internal reasoning tokens, which are billed like output tokens and can be several times longer than the final answer. Those extra tokens raise cost per call, and longer responses plus occasional retries pushed total usage to roughly double. We can control this with reasoning-effort limits, token budgets, caching, and spend monitoring by use case.
out 253 tok (+178 thinking) latency 5.4 s
Gemini 3.8 Flash passed · 3 sentences
When we enabled reasoning, the model began generating hidden "thinking tokens" to work through logic step-by-step before producing a final answer. Because AI vendors bill for every single token processed—visible or not—this internal deliberation dramatically inflated our billable volume per query. In short, while our total number of user requests remained flat, the cost per transaction doubled to buy higher accuracy on complex tasks.
out 705 tok (+624 thinking) latency 6.4 s
Instruction following (exactly three sentences, so countable), audience shaping (CFO register), and the hidden-thinking billing gap the token meters below expose.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (1017) passed · 8/8 cases
```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` The bug is that `cur` starts at `0` and is incremented only when two adjacent items match, so it counts equal adjacent pairs rather than run length; a run of length `k` is recorded as `k - 1`. Consequently, a single-element input returns `0`, and a run ending at the last index—especially a one-element final run—is undercounted or never counted. The fix initializes every run to length `1`, increments on a match, resets to `1` on a mismatch, updates `best` each iteration, and handles the empty input separately.
out 1300 tok (+1095 thinking) latency 11.8 s
Gemini 3.8 Flash passed · 8/8 cases
Here is the corrected function: ```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 best = max(best, cur) else: cur = 1 return best ``` ### Explanation of the Bug The original function counted equal-neighbor transitions rather than the actual items making up each run. Because `cur` started at `0` (and was reset to `0` on mismatches), every run was undercounted by one: single-element lists returned `0` because the loop never executed, and any subsequent run—including those ending at the last index—recorded a count of $N - 1$ instead of $N$. The fix handles empty input upfront, initializes both `cur` and `best` to `1` (since any single element forms a run of length 1), and resets `cur` to `1` whenever a new run begins.
out 1393 tok (+1149 thinking) latency 10.1 s
Whether the fix is actually correct (runnable), explanation density, and token efficiency on a bounded task.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (1017) passed · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld pending the Q4 close"
{"company":"Meridian Robotics","quarter":"September quarter","revenue_usd_m":412,"growth_pct":11,"guidance":"withheld pending the Q4 close"}
out 1375 tok (+1337 thinking) latency 12.2 s
Gemini 3.8 Flash passed · 5/5 fields, guidance null
```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": null, "guidance": null } ```
out 3989 tok (+3932 thinking) latency 30.4 s
Schema obedience (no invented fields), hallucination pressure (guidance is explicitly withheld), and structured-output path differences.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (1017) passed · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question
Today we’re introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Cache in the API gateway. It stores identical prompt requests once and serves cached responses across supported model providers, reducing duplicate calls, latency, and spend. Teams can set cache keys by model, temperature, system prompt, and custom metadata, then choose TTLs per route or workspace. The gateway handles provider fallback while keeping cached results consistent with your policy. Is your team paying twice for the same prompt? Cross-Provider Prompt Cache helps you answer that. Configure it in the gateway dashboard, inspect hit rates by provider, and invalidate entries on demand. Existing gateway routes need no code changes; enable the feature and define your caching rules. Cross-Provider Prompt Cache is available for all API gateway customers.
out 2487 tok (+2335 thinking) latency 17.1 s
Gemini 3.8 Flash passed · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question
Why pay multiple model providers for the exact same output? Introducing Universal Prompt Cache, our latest API gateway capability engineered to cut compute expenses and drop inference latency. When your application makes a call, the gateway inspects a central memory layer before routing traffic to external LLMs. If an identical query was previously processed by OpenAI, Anthropic, or Mistral, our gateway returns that response immediately. This shared cache eliminates duplicate token fees and insulates your production apps from vendor rate limits or unexpected downtime. Developers can easily customize expiration settings, enforce strict data privacy controls, and configure invalidation logic across every endpoint. Stop wasting your budget on repeated queries. Enable prompt caching in your dashboard to accelerate your pipeline today.
out 3833 tok (+3688 thinking) latency 21.8 s
Constraint obedience (word budget, banned-word list, the single question), style fingerprint, and length control.
Switch between them with one line
Both ids are in every tab below; the highlighted pair of lines is the only edit. Same endpoint, same key, same request shape.
from openai import OpenAI
client = OpenAI(
base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
api_key="sk-syn-...",
)
resp = client.chat.completions.create(
model="deepseek-v4.1-flash-1017",
# model="gemini-3.8-flash", # uncomment this line, comment the one above
messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)import OpenAI from "openai";
const client = new OpenAI({
baseURL: "https://synthorai.io/v1",
apiKey: "sk-syn-...",
});
const resp = await client.chat.completions.create({
model: "deepseek-v4.1-flash-1017",
// model: "gemini-3.8-flash", // uncomment this line, comment the one above
messages: [{ role: "user", content: "Summarize this diff" }],
reasoning_effort: "medium",
});
console.log(resp.choices[0].message.content);curl https://synthorai.io/v1/chat/completions \
-H "Authorization: Bearer sk-syn-..." \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
"model": "deepseek-v4.1-flash-1017",
# "model": "gemini-3.8-flash", # uncomment this line, comment the one above
"messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "Hello"}],
"reasoning_effort": "medium"
}'package main
import (
"context"
"fmt"
"github.com/openai/openai-go/v3"
"github.com/openai/openai-go/v3/option"
)
func main() {
client := openai.NewClient(
option.WithBaseURL("https://synthorai.io/v1"),
option.WithAPIKey("sk-syn-..."),
)
resp, _ := client.Chat.Completions.New(context.TODO(), openai.ChatCompletionNewParams{
Model: "deepseek-v4.1-flash-1017",
// Model: "gemini-3.8-flash", // uncomment this line, comment the one above
Messages: []openai.ChatCompletionMessageParamUnion{
openai.UserMessage("Summarize this diff"),
},
ReasoningEffort: openai.ReasoningEffortMedium,
})
fmt.Println(resp.Choices[0].Message.Content)
}import com.openai.client.OpenAIClient;
import com.openai.client.okhttp.OpenAIOkHttpClient;
import com.openai.models.chat.completions.*;
import com.openai.models.ReasoningEffort;
OpenAIClient client = OpenAIOkHttpClient.builder()
.baseUrl("https://synthorai.io/v1")
.apiKey("sk-syn-...")
.build();
ChatCompletion resp = client.chat().completions().create(
ChatCompletionCreateParams.builder()
.model("deepseek-v4.1-flash-1017")
// .model("gemini-3.8-flash") // uncomment this line, comment the one above
.addUserMessage("Summarize this diff")
.reasoningEffort(ReasoningEffort.MEDIUM)
.build());
System.out.println(resp.choices().get(0).message().content().orElse(""));FAQ
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (1017) or Gemini 3.8 Flash?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (1017) is cheaper on the "Input / 1M tokens" row ($0.3 vs $0.75, 2.5× apart). Other rows may point the other way; the table above carries the full rate card, and real cost depends on your mix.
Can I A/B test DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (1017) against Gemini 3.8 Flash without two integrations?
Yes. Both are served through the same OpenAI-compatible endpoint with one API key. Switching is a one-line change to the model id, so you can route a fraction of traffic to each and compare bills directly.
Do DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (1017) and Gemini 3.8 Flash support prompt caching?
Yes. Both bill cache reads below their input rate, so warm-prefix workloads cost less than the list rates suggest. The exact cache-read rows are in the pricing table above.