New Sign up free, 10 calls on us. Up to $1, no card needed.

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GPT-6.1 Sol

vs

Which one, when

These two are close on shape: both take text and image in, return text, and carry chat, vision, code, reasoning and tools, with near-identical context windows of 1000000 for deepseek-v4.1-flash and 1050000 for gpt-6.1-sol. Pick deepseek-v4.1-flash for cost-sensitive or long-form work: at $0.3 input and $1.2 output it runs about 6.7x and 8.3x cheaper than gpt-6.1-sol's $2 and $10, and its 393216 max output is roughly 3x the 128000 cap. Choose gpt-6.1-sol when you want OpenAI's newer 2026-09-29 release, noting its thinking cannot be turned off.

Benchmarks

GPT-6.1 Sol: the vendor has not published benchmark scores.

Above averageNo peer higherDeepSeek V4.1 Flash14 / 194 / 19
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash GPT-6.1 Sol other models measured peer average ★ no peer scored higher
DeepSWE 1.1
no peer scored higher 74.2%
N/A
Cybergym
no peer scored higher 88.1%
N/A
GPQA Diamond
90.9%
N/A
Agents' Last Exam
31.8%
N/A
Chartography with tools
78.9%
N/A

Vendor-published: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic ByteDance DeepSeek Google MiniMax Moonshot OpenAI Tencent Z.ai

Pricing

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash GPT-6.1 Sol Δ
Input / 1M tokens $0.3 $2 0.15×
Output / 1M tokens $1.2 $10 0.12×
Cache read / 1M tokens $0.03 $0.1 0.3×
Cache write no separate charge no separate charge -

Rates from the live catalog at build time; each model page carries the current card.

Where they sit - input price per 1M tokens across all 76 chat models on this billing unit (log scale)

Capabilities

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash GPT-6.1 Sol
Tool use yes yes
Thinking control yes - vendor dial not published always on
Structured output - yes
Prompt caching implicit (automatic) implicit (automatic)
Cache lifetime no fixed TTL (evicted when unused) 5-10m, up to 1h
Minimum cached prefix not published 1024 tokens

Specs

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash GPT-6.1 Sol
Input modalities text image text image
Output modalities text text
Released 2026-09-10 2026-09-29
Knowledge cutoff - 2026-04
Context window 1M 1.1M
Max output 393K 128K
Thinking parameter - reasoning.effort
Accepted values -
reasoning.effort
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max
Default - medium

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 · GPT-6.1 Sol

One prompt, both models - measured through the gateway

PROMPT Explain to a CFO, in exactly three sentences, why our LLM bill doubled after we enabled reasoning. CHECK exactly 3 sentences

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash passed · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning changed the unit economics: the model now spends extra billable tokens internally to “think” before producing the answer, and those reasoning tokens are charged like output tokens even though users never see them. That added token generation—plus longer contexts and occasional retries on harder prompts—roughly doubled our cost per request. We can control this by capping reasoning depth, routing only complex queries to reasoning models, and caching common prompts to bring the bill back down.

out 423 tok (+327 thinking) latency 14.6 s

GPT-6.1 Sol passed · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning makes the model do more computational work before answering, and many providers bill the resulting reasoning tokens even though users never see them. That means the same number of requests can cost twice as much because each request consumes more billable tokens, even if the visible answers stay the same length. We should confirm the increase in our usage breakdown and reserve higher reasoning levels for tasks where the improvement justifies the added cost.

out 144 tok (+54 thinking) latency 6.6 s

Instruction following (exactly three sentences - countable), audience shaping (CFO register), and the hidden-thinking billing gap the token meters below expose.

PROMPT This function is supposed to return the longest run of consecutive equal items, but callers report it is off by one on single-element inputs and misses runs that end at the last index. Fix it and explain the bug in one paragraph. CHECK fix passes tests

DeepSeek V4.1 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 `cur` is counting equal adjacent pairs, not elements in the current run: every time `xs[i] == xs[i - 1]`, the run length increases by one element, but the first element of the run was never counted, so all runs are undercounted by one. Also, `best` starts at `0`, so single-element inputs return `0` instead of `1`, and a one-element run ending at the last index is missed entirely.

out 918 tok (+733 thinking) latency 11.4 s

GPT-6.1 Sol 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 original function counts equal adjacent pairs rather than items in a run: a run of length `n` has only `n - 1` equal pairs, so a single-element input returns `0`, and a run ending at the last index is also undercounted. It does process the last index, so the issue is not a missing final check. Initializing each nonempty run to `1` and updating `best` after every iteration correctly counts items, including singleton and trailing runs; empty inputs still return `0`.

out 189 tok latency 6.3 s

Whether the fix is actually correct (runnable), explanation density, and token efficiency on a bounded task.

PROMPT Extract a JSON object with fields {company, quarter, revenue_usd_m, growth_pct, guidance} from this text. Use null for anything not stated; add no other fields. CHECK valid JSON, schema exact

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash passed · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld pending the Q4 close"

{"company":"Meridian Robotics","quarter":"September quarter","revenue_usd_m":412,"growth_pct":11.0,"guidance":"withheld pending the Q4 close"}

out 1707 tok (+1667 thinking) latency 15.1 s

GPT-6.1 Sol passed · 5/5 fields, guidance "Withheld pending the Q4 close"

{ "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": null, "growth_pct": "eleven and change", "guidance": "Withheld pending the Q4 close" }

out 345 tok (+285 thinking) latency 10.2 s

Schema obedience (no invented fields), hallucination pressure (guidance is explicitly withheld), and structured-output path differences.

PROMPT Write a 120-word product announcement for an API gateway feature that caches prompts across providers. Forbidden words: "seamless", "unlock", "game-changer", "revolutionize", "empower". Exactly one sentence must be a question. CHECK 120 words, 0 banned words

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash passed · 116 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Today we're launching Cross-Provider Prompt Cache for our API gateway. It stores identical prompt requests and their responses across supported model providers, then serves cached results when a match is found. Teams can cut duplicate inference costs, reduce latency, and keep behavior consistent during provider failover. The cache works with configurable TTLs, per-route rules, and cache-key controls, so you decide what is reusable and what must stay fresh. Does your application send the same prompts to multiple providers? Now your gateway can answer many of those calls without another upstream request. Existing observability dashboards show hit rates, saved tokens, and estimated spend reduction. Enable it in the gateway console, set your policy, and start caching today.

out 917 tok (+770 thinking) latency 9.0 s

GPT-6.1 Sol passed · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Cache, a new API gateway feature that stores reusable prompts and manages caching across your supported AI providers. Why rebuild the same context every time your application switches models? With one configuration, teams can reuse shared instructions, standardize cache policies, and reduce repeated prompt processing wherever provider caching is available. The gateway handles provider-specific requirements while giving you clear visibility into cache hits, usage, and estimated savings. Set expiration windows, isolate cached content by project, and invalidate entries when prompts change. Your existing routing logic stays intact, so you can compare models without rebuilding your caching workflow. […]

out 588 tok (+435 thinking) latency 13.9 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",
    # model="gpt-6.1-sol",  # uncomment this line, comment the one above
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
    reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

Get your API key →

FAQ

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or GPT-6.1 Sol?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is cheaper on input / 1m tokens ($0.3 vs $2, 6.7× apart). Other rows may point the other way - the table above carries the full card, and real cost depends on your mix.

Can I A/B test DeepSeek V4.1 Flash against GPT-6.1 Sol without two integrations?

Yes. Both are served through the same OpenAI-compatible endpoint with one API key - switching is a one-line model-string change, so you can route a fraction of traffic to each and compare bills directly.

Do DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and GPT-6.1 Sol support prompt caching?

Yes - both bill cached 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.

Related comparisons

From our measured studies