Data as of October 19, 2026 · How the score is built
Released Oct 17, 20261M contextDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 model card
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Decision readingDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 scores 65.7 out of 100 and ranks #35 of 226. This profile shows 31 source-displayable benchmark rows; its strongest eligible category is Coding at #18. API pricing is $0.3 input and $1.2 output per million tokens, with cached input at $0.006.
Released Oct 17, 2026 — see all recent releases
Decision snapshot
Each value carries a field reference instead of floating alone. Markers compare this model with the current ranked and priced catalog; they are not absolute quality thresholds.
Capability
65.7/100
field median 50#35 of 226 ranked models
Public
#35of 226
Verified #24 of 87
Price
$0.30input / $1.20 output
input median $0.75cached $0.006 · blended $0.75
Speed
231tok/s
field median 94 tok/sFirst token 9.55 s
Context
1Mtokens
field median 256,000Maximum output length is tracked separately
Strongest published evidence
Coding ranks #18. Particularly well-suited for software development and code generation tasks.
Validate before choosing
31 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. Knowledge is its lowest eligible category at #36.
Source-linked · 31 displayable benchmark rows
Category score record
Scores and ranks appear only where published evidence can be displayed. The table keeps the score, weight, cohort, and evidence state together.
| Category | Score | Rank | Percentile | Weight | Benchmarks | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AgenticRank #24 of 130Percentile 82ndWeight 22%10 benchmarksVerified | 61.7 | 10 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| CodingRank #18 of 151Percentile 89thWeight 20%8 benchmarksVerified | 60.9 | 8 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| ReasoningRank Not rankedWeight 17%3 benchmarksVerified | 82.5 | 3 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| MultimodalRank Not rankedWeight 12%3 benchmarksVerified | 77.9 | 3 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| KnowledgeRank #36 of 186Percentile 81stWeight 12%3 benchmarksVerified | 65.2 | 3 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| Inst. FollowingWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| MathRank Not rankedWeight 5%3 benchmarksVerified | 70.1 | 3 benchmarks | Verified |
31 of 686 tracked benchmark slots have displayable evidence · bars run 0–100
Coverage detailsHow much of this is verified
Coverage is split by category so a strong number never hides a thin evidence base. Verified means the row is tied to a published source; provisional rows remain visible but separate.
- Agentic10/10 verified
- Coding8/8 verified
- Reasoning3/3 verified
- Multimodal3/3 verified
- Knowledge3/3 verified
- MultilingualNot measured
- Inst. FollowingNot measured
- Math3/3 verified
Capability shape
Each axis shows percentile within that category’s eligible cohort. The comparison outline is the median of the six nearest public-score peers; a collapsed vertex means the category is not rank-eligible.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 category percentile values
- Agentic82nd percentile
- Coding89th percentile
- ReasoningNot eligible
- MultimodalNot eligible
- Knowledge81st percentile
- MultilingualNot eligible
- Instruction followingNot eligible
- MathNot eligible
The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.
Eligible category ranks
- Agentic#24/130
- Coding#18/151
- ReasoningNot ranked
- MultimodalNot ranked
- Knowledge#36/186
- MultilingualNot ranked
- Inst. FollowingNot ranked
- MathNot ranked
Benchmark ledger
Coding opens by default. The marker compares each value with the best source-verified result in the catalog; provisional leaders do not set the reference. Expand the remaining categories for every published row.
Coding8 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DeepSWE | Score77.0% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Muse Wonder Full · 79.0% | Gap2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| CodeforcesCodeforces Rating | Score3471.0 | Versus best verified row Best verified: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 · 3471.0 | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 | Score90.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: SWE-2 · 92.8% | Gap2.2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| terminalBench3 | Score30% | Versus best verified row Best verified: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 · 30% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| ProgramBenchProgramBench: Can Language Models Rebuild Programs From Scratch? | Score29.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 93.0% | Gap63.9 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| NL2Repo | Score68.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 · 68.2% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| OpenHarmony BenchOpenHarmony Bench v1.0 | Score60.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 60.8% | Gap0.5 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
| Bug Hunt Bench | Score39.1 fixes | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Sonnet 5.5 · 51.3 fixes | Gap12.2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
Agentic10 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)Terminal-Bench 2.1, Vals AI run | Score74.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 87.3% | Gap12.8 behind | Weight4% ref. weight | |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 | Score90.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: SWE-2 · 92.8% | Gap2.2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 | Score42.30% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Sonnet 5.5 · 70.60% | Gap28.3 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| AutomationBench | Score60.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: MiniMax M3.1 Flash · 62.2% | Gap1.7 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| HLE w/ toolsHumanity's Last Exam with tools | Score63.9% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5.5 · 67.7% | Gap3.8 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| Agents' Last Exam | Score35.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 59.3% | Gap23.9 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| terminalBench3 | Score30% | Versus best verified row Best verified: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 · 30% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| CyberGym | Score88.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: MiMo-V2.6-Flash · 95.1% | Gap7 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| ExploitGym | Score15.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 42.4% | Gap27.1 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| CWE-bench v1 | Score55.0% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 68.0% | Gap13 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
Reasoning3 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| STEMBenchSTEMBench120: six-domain scientific research progress | Score2.49 | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 2.81 | Gap0.3 behind | WeightDisplay only | Benchmark exact |
| JevBench 1.4 | Score4.77 | Versus best verified row Best verified: classifier.dev (fast) · 70.82 | Gap66.1 behind | WeightDisplay only | |
| JevBench 1.5 | Score6.65 | Versus best verified row Best verified: classifier.dev (fast) · 74.66 | Gap68 behind | WeightDisplay only |
Multimodal3 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chartography (tools)Chartography with image and code tools | Score83.0% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Sonnet 5.5 · 90.2% | Gap7.2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| BabyVision w/ PythonBabyVision with Python | Score92.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 · 92.5% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| ZeroBench w/ PythonZeroBench_main with Python | Score51.0% | Versus best verified row Best verified: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 · 51.0% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Knowledge3 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HLEHumanity's Last Exam | Score42.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Fable 5.1 · 65% | Gap22.4 behind | Weight44% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| GPQAGraduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A | Score90.9% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 96% | Gap5.1 behind | Weight3% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| GPQA-DGPQA Diamond | Score90.9% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 96.0% | Gap5.1 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Math3 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)FrontierMath v2 Tiers 1-3 | Score67.368% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 93.684% | Gap26.3 behind | WeightWeighted 30% | Benchmark exact |
| FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)FrontierMath v2 Tier 4 | Score26.829% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6.1 Sol · 100.000% | Gap73.2 behind | WeightWeighted 10% | Benchmark exact |
| Apex | Score65.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Hy4 preview · 74.2% | Gap8.6 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
External signals1 row
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SEC-Bench Pro | Score62.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 85.4% | Gap22.6 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
What it costs to get this score
Published API price against the public score. The x-axis uses a log scale; the dashed path marks models that are not beaten by a cheaper, higher-scoring option. Price uses average of published input and output rates.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 · 65.7 score · $0.75 blended per million tokens
The chart opens on the current model. Scroll horizontally to inspect the full price axis.
Horizontal: blended price per million tokens, log scale · Vertical: public score
Published price history
This chart appears only when at least two dated first-party price records exist for the exact model. It shows rate changes, not an inferred cost trend.
2 dated first-party price records. The newest record lists $1.2 per million tokens.
Lineage
The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. Each score is estimated for that model; a relative can inform a sparse estimate but never sets a floor, so a newer release can score below an earlier one. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.
flash-reasoning · 1017
Spec sheet
Each documented value carries its source. Missing fields stay visible as not sourced or not published, rather than disappearing from the page.
- API model ID
- deepseek-flashDeepSeek models and pricing
- Context window
- 1MDeepSeek models and pricing
- Maximum output
- Not sourced yet
- Knowledge cutoff
- Not sourced yet
- Input modalities
- text, imageDeepSeek vision guide
- Output modalities
- textDeepSeek vision guide
- Parameters
- Not sourced yet
- Availability
- DeepSeek API · open weightsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 API changelog
- Cloud regions
- Not tracked yet
- Lifecycle
- activeDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 API changelog
- API capabilities
- Tool calling, structured outputs, and batch support are not tracked yet
- Prompt caching
- Published at $0.006 per million cached input tokensDeepSeek: Models & Pricing
- Self-host
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 needs ~640GB VRAM (8× NVIDIA H100 (80GB)).
- Rate limits
- Not tracked yet
How to read this profile
The visual layer above carries the decisions. These notes preserve the model, ranking, coverage, and family context behind the numbers.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 ranks #35 of 226 on the public leaderboard with a score of 65.67/100. Its source-verified position is #24 of 87.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 is a open weight model with a 1M context window. It uses an explicit reasoning mode, which can improve complex problem solving while adding latency and token use.
Updated October 17, 2026: DeepSeek upgraded the `deepseek-flash` API model, the web chat and the app to DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017, with the calling method and pricing unchanged, and published MIT-licensed 1017 weights on Hugging Face. DeepSeek calls it a minor update to V4.1 Flash with shorter outputs and faster task execution. The legacy `deepseek-v4-flash` and `deepseek-v4-flash-vision-exp` IDs are served by 1017 at the Flash price (https://api-docs.deepseek.com/updates, https://api-docs.deepseek.com/quick_start/pricing). Released September 10, 2026 as the smallest model in DeepSeek's new Causal Encoder-Decoder architecture family: 552B backbone parameters, 8B activated per token during prefill and 16B during decode, native image-and-text input, a 1M-token context window, and MIT-licensed weights on Hugging Face. The DeepSeek API serves it as `deepseek-flash` with thinking and non-thinking modes, tool calls, the Responses and Anthropic formats, and vision input. DeepSeek retired V4 Flash and V4 Flash Vision Exp the same day; the legacy `deepseek-v4-flash` and `deepseek-v4-flash-vision-exp` IDs temporarily route here. DeepSeek's September 10, 2026 announcement also said `deepseek-v4-pro` requests would route to V4.1 Flash at V4.1 Flash rates from 04:00 UTC on September 14, 2026 until V4.1 Pro launches. DeepSeek's pricing page, read September 17, 2026, says V4 Pro API service continues after September 14, 2026 with the billing method unchanged, and that DeepSeek will give notice of any change; the September 10 post had not been edited when read the same day (https://api-docs.deepseek.com/news/news260910, https://api-docs.deepseek.com/quick_start/pricing).
Its explicit predecessor is DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731. 31 of 686 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.
Its strongest eligible category is Coding at #18, while its lowest eligible position is Knowledge at #36. particularly well-suited for software development and code generation tasks.
Last updated October 19, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.
Deployment options
Self-host and provider-specific paths stay separate from benchmark evidence so operating constraints are visible before a score becomes the whole decision.
Self-host vs API cost
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
Questions
How does DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 perform overall in AI benchmarks?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 ranks #35 out of 226 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 65.67/100. Its evidence status is Supported, and this profile shows 31 source-displayable benchmark rows. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.
Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 good for knowledge and understanding?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 ranks #36 out of 186 eligible models for knowledge and understanding, with a public category score of 65.2/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 good for coding and programming?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 ranks #18 out of 151 eligible models for coding and programming, with a public category score of 60.9/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 good for mathematics?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 has source-displayable benchmark coverage for mathematics, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.
Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 good for reasoning and logic?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 has source-displayable benchmark coverage for reasoning and logic, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.
Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 ranks #24 out of 130 eligible models for agentic tool use and computer tasks, with a public category score of 61.7/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 good for multimodal and grounded tasks?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 has source-displayable benchmark coverage for multimodal and grounded tasks, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.
Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 open source?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 is an open-weight model from DeepSeek. Its weights can be downloaded for local or hosted deployment, subject to the published license. Open weight does not automatically mean open source: training data and training code may remain private, and commercial restrictions can still apply.
Does DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?
No. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 currently has 44 source-displayable rows across 686 tracked benchmark slots. The profile exposes published, non-generated evidence and leaves missing categories blank until an exact evaluation is available. Coverage describes how much was measured; it is not a penalty added to an individual benchmark result.
What is the context window size of DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 has a documented context window of 1M. That figure is the maximum combined prompt and retained-conversation space reported for this exact model; it is not the maximum output length. The profile keeps output limits separate because providers often publish those limits independently.