DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (1017) vs Qwen3.8 Flash
Which one, when
Both share a 1000000-token context window and text-plus-image input with chat, vision, code, reasoning and tool use, so the split is in output budget and rate card: deepseek-v4.1-flash-1017 allows 393216 max output tokens, 3x the 131072 of qwen3.8-flash, but charges $0.3 input and $1.2 output against $0.15 and $0.47, i.e. 2x and roughly 2.55x. Pick qwen3.8-flash for cheaper high-volume work, video input, structured output and the option to disable thinking; pick deepseek-v4.1-flash-1017 for very long single generations and its $0.006 cache reads versus $0.016.
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) | Qwen3.8 Flash | Δ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / 1M tokens | $0.3 | $0.15 | 2× |
| Output / 1M tokens | $1.2 | $0.47 | 2.6× |
| Cache read / 1M tokens | $0.006 | $0.016 | 0.38× |
| Cache write | no separate charge | 1.25x | - |
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) | Qwen3.8 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Tool calling | yes | yes |
| Thinking control | yes (vendor dial not published) | configurable |
| Structured output | - | yes |
| Prompt caching | implicit (automatic) | implicit + explicit |
| Cache lifetime | no fixed TTL (evicted when unused) | explicit: 5m, reset on hit |
| Minimum cached prefix | not published | 1024 tokens |
Specs
| DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (1017) | Qwen3.8 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Input modalities | text image | text image video |
| Output modalities | text | text |
| Released | 2026-10-17 | 2026-08-27 |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| Max output | 393K | 131K |
| Thinking parameter | - |
|
| Accepted values | - | enable_thinking
thinking_budget
preserve_thinking
|
| Default | - | on qwen3.8-flash is hybrid thinking with thinking enabled by default, thinking_budget defaults to the 262,144-token chain maximum, and preserve_thinking is off |
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) · Qwen3.8 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
Qwen3.8 Flash passed · 3 sentences
Enabling reasoning makes the model spend additional output tokens to plan and validate answers before responding, and those tokens are billed. It also increases compute and latency per request, so each task consumes more capacity than a non-reasoning call. As a result, billable tokens and compute roughly doubled, directly driving the higher invoice.
out 330 tok (+262 thinking) latency 8.9 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
Qwen3.8 Flash passed · 8/8 cases
```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 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` The bug is that the original version counts adjacent equal pairs rather than items in a run, starting both `cur` and `best` at `0`, and it resets `cur` to `0` after a mismatch, thereby discarding the first element of the new run. That makes single-element inputs return `0`, and because every run is effectively measured in “steps” between equal elements, the last element is not counted—particularly noticeable when the longest run ends at the final index.
out 2123 tok (+1933 thinking) latency 43.8 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
Qwen3.8 Flash passed · 5/5 fields, guidance null
{ "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null }
out 519 tok (+463 thinking) latency 10.5 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
Qwen3.8 Flash passed · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question
We are announcing prompt caching across providers in our API gateway. Store approved prompt outputs once and reuse them across supported model providers, cutting latency, cost, and duplicate token spend. The feature matches identical requests, checks validity, and returns cached results while preserving routing controls. Developers keep existing endpoints; the gateway manages storage, invalidation, and provider differences. This reduces noisy repeat calls, improves steady responses, and frees teams to focus on better agent workflows. OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Mistral, and custom routes are supported. Cache hits appear in analytics with latency, token, and cost reductions visible. Check retention and privacy rules before enabling it. Ready to add cache controls to your gateway? Enable it in settings and watch spend drop now.
out 5958 tok (+5805 thinking) latency 88.8 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="qwen3.8-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: "qwen3.8-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": "qwen3.8-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: "qwen3.8-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("qwen3.8-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 Qwen3.8 Flash?
Qwen3.8 Flash is cheaper on the "Input / 1M tokens" row ($0.15 vs $0.3, 2.0× 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 Qwen3.8 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 Qwen3.8 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.