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

DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) vs DeepSeek V4 Pro (0813)

vs

Which one, when — curated verdict, not a benchmark table

These two DeepSeek siblings are configured identically on paper: both carry a 1000000-token context window, 393216 max output tokens, text-in/text-out only, and the same chat, code, reasoning and tools flags. The only real difference on the fact sheet is the rate card, where deepseek-v4-pro-0813 costs about 4.29 times more at every tier ($1.32 vs $0.308 input, $3.96 vs $0.924 output, $0.132 vs $0.0308 cache reads). Default to deepseek-v4-flash-0731 for volume work and reach for the 0813 Pro tier only if your own evaluations justify the premium.

Pricing

DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) DeepSeek V4 Pro (0813) Δ
Input / 1M tokens $0.308 $1.32 0.23×
Output / 1M tokens $0.924 $3.96 0.23×
Cache read / 1M tokens $0.0308 $0.132 0.23×
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 63 chat models on this billing unit (log scale)

Capabilities

DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) DeepSeek V4 Pro (0813)
Tool use yes yes
Thinking control yes — vendor dial not published always on
Structured output yes yes
Prompt caching implicit (automatic) implicit (automatic)
Cache lifetime no fixed TTL (evicted when unused) no fixed TTL (evicted when unused)
Minimum cached prefix not published not published

Specs

DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) DeepSeek V4 Pro (0813)
Input modalities text text
Output modalities text text
Released 2026-07-31 2026-08-13
Context window 1M 1M
Max output 393K 393K
Thinking parameter reasoning_effort
Accepted values
reasoning_effort
  • the model card documents low
  • high
  • max

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 Flash (0731) · DeepSeek V4 Pro (0813)

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 Flash (0731) passed · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning mode prompts the model to generate extensive internal chain-of-thought tokens before answering, often multiplying total token output per query by several times. This directly inflates costs because we are billed per token, and these reasoning tokens are processed at a premium compute tier that carries a higher price per million tokens. However, this spend buys measurably higher accuracy and fewer failed calls, so we are tracking it against specific error-reduction KPIs to ensure the ROI justifies the increase.

out 365 tok (+266 thinking) latency 5.1 s

DeepSeek V4 Pro (0813) passed · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning causes the model to generate a hidden chain-of-thought with many additional tokens before producing the final answer, which sharply increases compute consumption per request. Those extra reasoning tokens are billed at the same or higher rates, so total usage doubled even though the volume of final outputs stayed similar. We can control this by adjusting reasoning effort, setting token limits, or routing only complex requests through reasoning mode.

out 308 tok (+226 thinking) latency 5.1 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 Flash (0731) 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 best = max(best, cur) else: cur = 1 return best ``` The original bug stems from initializing `cur` to 0 and only incrementing it when adjacent elements are equal, which counts the number of *equal transitions* rather than the actual run length—so every run of length L is reported as L−1, and a single‑element run (with no transitions) yields 0. Moreover, because `best` is updated only inside the equality branch, it never accounts for a run that ends at the last element if that run is longer than any previously seen (though the real issue remains the off‑by‑one). […]

out 1268 tok (+1016 thinking) latency 14.0 s

DeepSeek V4 Pro (0813) 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` was initialized to `0` and only counted adjacent matching pairs, so a run of length `n` produced `n - 1` (or `0` for a single element) instead of `n`. The code also reset to `0` on a change, when the new run should start at length `1`. Initializing `cur` and `best` to `1` fixes both the single-element case and runs ending at the last index.

out 1315 tok (+1130 thinking) latency 16.9 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 Flash (0731) passed · 5/5 fields, guidance null

{ "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "Q3", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": null, "guidance": null }

out 1119 tok (+1072 thinking) latency 12.3 s

DeepSeek V4 Pro (0813) passed · 5/5 fields, guidance null

{"company":"Meridian Robotics","quarter":"September quarter","revenue_usd_m":412,"growth_pct":11.0,"guidance":null}

out 2155 tok (+2121 thinking) latency 26.0 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 Flash (0731) missed · 141 words, 0 banned, 1 question

**Introducing Prompt Cache for API Gateway** We are pleased to announce Prompt Cache, a new feature that stores and reuses identical prompt prefixes across all connected LLM providers. By automatically recognizing repeated requests, this cache reduces token consumption and lowers latency without altering your application logic. Whether you use OpenAI, Anthropic, or open-source models, the cache operates transparently, ensuring consistent behavior while cutting costs. Developers can configure cache TTL and scoping rules via a simple API call, giving you precise control over data freshness and privacy. This feature also minimizes redundant upstream calls, freeing provider rate limits for more critical workloads. Start caching today through the dashboard or CLI, and watch your operational expenses drop significantly. […]

out 254 tok (+80 thinking) latency 4.4 s

DeepSeek V4 Pro (0813) passed · 121 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Introducing cross-provider prompt caching in our API gateway. Send a prompt once, and the gateway stores its computed prefix across Anthropic, OpenAI, and other LLM providers. Subsequent requests with the same prompt hit the cache, cutting latency and token costs while keeping outputs consistent across routing decisions and provider failovers. Teams can route identical prompts between providers without reprocessing shared context or lengthy system instructions. How much could you save on repeated prompt prefixes? The cache respects provider-specific key formats, handles TTLs automatically, and works with streaming and batch requests. Enable it with one configuration flag—no changes to your application code. Available today on all plans. Monitor cache hit rates, token savings, and provider-specific performance metrics in the live dashboard.

out 2845 tok (+2694 thinking) latency 25.5 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-flash-0731",
    # model="deepseek-v4-pro-0813",  # uncomment this line, comment the one above
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
    reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

Get an API key →

FAQ

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) or DeepSeek V4 Pro (0813)?

DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) is cheaper on input / 1m tokens ($0.308 vs $1.32, 4.3× 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 Flash (0731) against DeepSeek V4 Pro (0813) 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 Flash (0731) and DeepSeek V4 Pro (0813) 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