Skip to main content

Model comparison

Celeris-1 vs DeepSeek V4 Flash

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 1 shared benchmark result across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

Celeris
N/A
No comparison
58.88/100
1 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Celeris-1 unranked (Not scored); DeepSeek V4 Flash #61 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Celeris-1 and DeepSeek V4 Flash share 1 comparable benchmark result. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to Celeris-1; 21 to DeepSeek V4 Flash.

Updated July 24, 2026
Shared results
1
Celeris-1 only
0
DeepSeek V4 Flash only
21
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Treat this as a split decision. Celeris-1 makes more sense if knowledge is the priority; DeepSeek V4 Flash is the better fit if you want the cheaper token bill or you need the larger 1M context window.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 1 shared benchmark result across 1 evidence category; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Celeris-1 and DeepSeek V4 Flash finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.

Celeris-1 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.00 input / $6.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.14 input / $0.28 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V4 Flash. That is roughly 21.4x on output cost alone. DeepSeek V4 Flash gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 8K for Celeris-1.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Celeris-1 and DeepSeek V4 Flash
CategoryCeleris-1ΔDeepSeek V4 Flash
KnowledgeCeleris-175.9Margin 37.1DeepSeek V4 Flash38.8
AgenticCeleris-1Not measuredMarginNo overlapDeepSeek V4 Flash49.1
CodingCeleris-1Not measuredMarginNo overlapDeepSeek V4 Flash64.2
MathCeleris-1Not measuredMarginNo overlapDeepSeek V4 Flash40.8

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Celeris-1B · DeepSeek V4 Flash
  1. MMLU-Pro

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 75.9%B 83%
    Winner: DeepSeek V4 FlashΔ 7.1
    MMLU-Pro: Celeris-1 scored 75.9%; DeepSeek V4 Flash scored 83%. DeepSeek V4 Flash wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricCeleris-1DeepSeek V4 FlashComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensCeleris-1$2 input / $6 outputDeepSeek V4 Flash$0.14 input / $0.28 outputDeepSeek V4 Flash has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondCeleris-1Not availableDeepSeek V4 FlashNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenCeleris-1Not availableDeepSeek V4 FlashNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensCeleris-18KDeepSeek V4 Flash1MDeepSeek V4 Flash lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkCeleris-1DeepSeek V4 FlashResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 49.1%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 64%Not comparable
ToolathlonSource 40.7%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 57.8%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 54.35%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkCeleris-1DeepSeek V4 FlashResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 73.7%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 49.1%Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource 69.7%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 49.1%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkCeleris-1DeepSeek V4 FlashResult
MRCR 1MSource 37.5%Not comparable
CorpusQA 1MSource 15.5%Not comparable
KnowledgeCeleris-1 wins
BenchmarkCeleris-1DeepSeek V4 FlashResult
MMLU-ProSource 75.9%83%DeepSeek V4 Flash leads
SimpleQASource 23.1%Not comparable
Chinese-SimpleQASource 71.5%Not comparable
GPQASource 71.2%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 71.2%Not comparable
HLESource 8.1%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkCeleris-1DeepSeek V4 FlashResult
HMMT Feb 2026Source 40.8%Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource 41.9%Not comparable
ApexSource 1.0%Not comparable
Apex ShortlistSource 9.3%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkCeleris-1DeepSeek V4 FlashResult
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1238Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Celeris-1 or DeepSeek V4 Flash?

Celeris-1 and DeepSeek V4 Flash are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Celeris-1 or DeepSeek V4 Flash?

Celeris-1 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 75.9 versus 38.8. Inside this category, MMLU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 24, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.