Model vs model
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Ling 3.1 Flash
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 is the model to pick by default: it has the higher Intelligence Index (45.1 against 43.9) and costs $0.26 per 1M tokens blended against $0.45. Choose Ling 3.1 Flash if you need its slight edge on SciCode, or if you need to send large inputs, since its 262K context is smaller, but it is text-only and costs more.
At a glance
Longer bar means the bigger number.
Blended price · per 1M tokens, lower is better
Intelligence Index · Artificial Analysis, higher is better
Context window · tokens it can read at once
Where they sit among all 44 models
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 ranks 10th of the 43 models with an Intelligence Index, Ling 3.1 Flash 12th. Up and to the left is smarter for less money. Hover or tap a dot for its numbers, then click it to compare that model with DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017.
Which one to pick
Pick DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 if
- you want the lower bill ($0.26 vs $0.45 per 1M tokens blended)
- you want the higher overall score (45.1 vs 43.9)
- you need a longer context window (1.05M vs 262K tokens)
- you need to send images
How smart is each one?
Of the 10 scores both models have, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 is ahead on 5, and 5 are within a point.
Every intelligence score we have
Out of 100, higher is better. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 Ling 3.1 Flash
Overall
Intelligence Index
45.143.9
By field of work
Finance & accounting
48.345.5Legal
46.441.6Healthcare & medicine
43.7Ling 3.1 Flash: not scored yet
Economics
50.5 · 49.9Engineering
45.2 · 44.3Strategy & operations
52.547.9
Benchmarks
Factual knowledge · SimpleQA
42.5Ling 3.1 Flash: not scored yet
Hard reasoning · Humanity's Last Exam
43.3 · 43.5Scientific coding · SciCode
55.9 · 56.8Terminal tasks · Terminal-Bench 4.0
33.832.8Long documents · AA-LCR
82.7 · 82.3
The specs
| Spec | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 | Ling 3.1 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $0.15 per 1M | $0.30 per 1M |
| Output price | $0.60 per 1M | $0.90 per 1M |
| Cost per test task | $0.2620 | Not tested |
| Context window | 1.05M | 262K |
| Max output | 393K | 33K |
| Accepts | Text, Image | Text |
| Open weights | Yes | Yes |
| Lab | DeepSeek | InclusionAI |
| Released | Oct 2026 | Sep 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | May 2025 | Not published |
Blended price weighs 3 parts input to 1 part output. List prices from models.dev. Cost per test task from Artificial Analysis.
Questions
Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 or Ling 3.1 Flash cheaper?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 is cheaper. It charges $0.15 per 1M input tokens and $0.60 per 1M output tokens, against $0.30 and $0.90 for Ling 3.1 Flash. Blended 3 parts input to 1 part output, that is $0.26 against $0.45 per 1M tokens.
Which is smarter, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 or Ling 3.1 Flash?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 45.1 against 43.9 for Ling 3.1 Flash. The biggest differences are on Terminal-Bench 4.0 (33.8 vs 32.8).
Which has the longer context window?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 accepts 1.05M tokens, against 262K for Ling 3.1 Flash.
Can I compare DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and Ling 3.1 Flash on my own prompt?
Yes. ModelCompare sends one prompt to both models at once and shows each answer side by side with what it cost. You can try it free without an account.
Related comparisons
Where the numbers come from
Intelligence Index and benchmark scores are from Artificial Analysis, at each model’s highest effort, except SimpleQA, which is from Epoch AI, and the Uncensored score, which is from the UGI Leaderboard. The hallucination test is ours: questions with one exact answer, fake evidence pushed against right answers and requests that tempt a model to name packages that don’t exist. Prices are list prices from models.dev. Example answers come from our own test runs. Updated October 25, 2026.