Model A

DeepSeek

—

Evidence status unavailable

90% interval unavailable

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.8 Max

Updated September 10, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.

Model B

Qwen3.8 Max

Alibaba

71.61/100

Supported · Public rank #11

90% interval 67.9–75.3

Decision reading

At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner.

12 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Share or export

Share on X LinkedInSocial card CSV JSON

Which one for your work

Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.

No workload recommendation clears the current evidence threshold.

Use the matched evidence, workload costs, and sourced specifications below instead of treating a point score as a universal answer.

Show secondary and unsupported calls

Coding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Not enough matched evidence
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.
Confidence: limited
Agentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is not ranked on the public lane for agentic, so no winner is named for agentic.
Confidence: limited
Long documents
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
No clear pick
The documented context windows are equal.
Confidence: documented
Chat turn cost
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates
Cache-heavy agent loop cost
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates
Repository review cost
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates

What is actually comparable

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.

9 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash only

12 Shared

48 Qwen3.8 Max only

Shared results: 12
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash only: 9
Qwen3.8 Max only: 48
Like-for-like categories: 0 / 8

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign lane for agentic, coding, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.

Agentic

Not comparable

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: Not ranked
Qwen3.8 Max: 67.2; Supported · #9/152
Basis: BenchAlign lane · 8 vs 15 public rows
Reading: Not comparable

Coding

Not comparable

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: Not ranked
Qwen3.8 Max: 60.8; Supported · #20/151
Basis: BenchAlign lane · 6 vs 12 public rows
Reading: Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: Not ranked
Qwen3.8 Max: 86.5; Unranked · 2 rankable rows
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Knowledge

Not comparable

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: Not ranked
Qwen3.8 Max: 68.8; Supported · #17/182
Basis: BenchAlign lane · 3 vs 6 public rows
Reading: Not comparable

Math

Not comparable

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: Not ranked
Qwen3.8 Max: Not ranked
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: Not ranked
Qwen3.8 Max: Not ranked
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: Not ranked
Qwen3.8 Max: 87.4; #5/48
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: Not ranked
Qwen3.8 Max: 90.7; #18/121
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Category scores with the server-provided evidence basis for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and Qwen3.8 Max
Category	DeepSeek V4.1 Flash	Qwen3.8 Max	Basis	Reading
Agentic	Not ranked	67.2Supported · #9/152	Not comparableBenchAlign lane · 8 vs 15 public rows	Not comparable
Coding	Not ranked	60.8Supported · #20/151	Not comparableBenchAlign lane · 6 vs 12 public rows	Not comparable
Reasoning	Not ranked	86.5Unranked · 2 rankable rows	Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows	Not comparable
Knowledge	Not ranked	68.8Supported · #17/182	Not comparableBenchAlign lane · 3 vs 6 public rows	Not comparable
Math	Not ranked	Not ranked	Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows	Not comparable
Multilingual	Not ranked	Not ranked	Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows	Not comparable
Multimodal	Not ranked	87.4#5/48	Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows	Not comparable
Instruction following	Not ranked	90.7#18/121	Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows	Not comparable

Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.

Shape of the matched evidence

Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.

Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.

AutomationBench
Agentic
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 54.8%Qwen3.8 Max: 27.3%Normalized gap 27.5DeepSeek V4.1 Flash source Qwen3.8 Max source
HLE
Knowledge
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 36.8%Qwen3.8 Max: 43.6%Normalized gap 6.8DeepSeek V4.1 Flash source Qwen3.8 Max source
GPQA
Knowledge
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 90.9%Qwen3.8 Max: 92.6%Normalized gap 1.7DeepSeek V4.1 Flash source Qwen3.8 Max source

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.

Chat turn

1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: $0.0009; Fits in one request
Qwen3.8 Max: API rate not published; Fits in one request

Qwen3.8 Max has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: $0.0186; Fits in one request
Qwen3.8 Max: API rate not published; Fits in one request

Qwen3.8 Max has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: $0.0192; Fits in one request
Qwen3.8 Max: API rate not published; Fits in one request; Cached-input rate unavailable

Qwen3.8 Max has no comparable published API token rate.

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

SpecificationDeepSeek V4.1 FlashQwen3.8 Max

Context window

Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash

DeepSeek models and pricing

Qwen3.8 Max

Alibaba Cloud Model Studio pricing

API model ID

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash

deepseek-flash

DeepSeek models and pricing

Qwen3.8 Max

qwen3.8-max

Alibaba Cloud Model Studio pricing

Cached-input rate

A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash

$0.006 per 1M cached input tokens

DeepSeek: Models & Pricing

Qwen3.8 Max

No comparable hosted API rate

Alibaba Cloud Model Studio pricing

Documented inputs

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash

text, image

DeepSeek vision guide

Qwen3.8 Max

Not sourced

Documented outputs

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash

text

DeepSeek vision guide

Qwen3.8 Max

Not sourced

Provider availability

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash

Generally Available · DeepSeek API, open weights

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash release

Qwen3.8 Max

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash

Reasoning

Qwen3.8 Max

Reasoning

Weight access

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash

Open Weight

Qwen3.8 Max

Open Weight

License

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash

Open Weight

Qwen3.8 Max

Open Weight

Release date

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash

2026-09-10

Qwen3.8 Max

2026-08-03

If you already use one of these models

Deployment change: The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
Quality signal: At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner.
Workload cost: A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff: Both models list 1M.

Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Benchmark evidence

The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.

Browse raw public benchmark evidence69 rows

Agentic

Terminal-Bench 2.1
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash90.6%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max86.6%
Source
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads this result
terminalBench3
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash30%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max—
Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 4.0
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash31.20%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max—
Not directly comparable
CyberGym
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash88.1%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max—
Not directly comparable
ExploitGym
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash15.3%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max—
Not directly comparable
HLE w/ tools
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash63.9%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max56.2%
Source
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads this result
AutomationBench
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash54.8%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max27.3%
Source
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads this result
Agents' Last Exam
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash31.8%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max52.4%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max leads this result
CoWorkBench
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max74.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
JobBench
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max53.4%
Source
Not directly comparable
skillsBench
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max70.2%
Source
Not directly comparable
Toolathlon-Verified
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max72.5%
Source
Not directly comparable
WideResearch
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max81.9%
Source
Not directly comparable
OSWorld-Verified
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max86.1%
Source
Not directly comparable
OSWorld 2.0
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max19.4%
Source
Not directly comparable
WebArena-Verified
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max66.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
AndroidWorld
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max85.3%
Source
Not directly comparable
MobileWorld
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max77.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max67.4%
Source
Not directly comparable

Coding

Codeforces
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash3471.0
Source
Qwen3.8 Max—
Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash90.6%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max86.6%
Source
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads this result
terminalBench3
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash30%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max—
Not directly comparable
DeepSWE
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash74.2%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max56.6%
Source
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads this result
ProgramBench
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash20.3%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max—
Not directly comparable
NL2Repo
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash65.4%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max55.9%
Source
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads this result
SWE-bench Pro
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max67.7%
Source
Not directly comparable
FrontierSWE
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max73.5%
Source
Not directly comparable
MLS-Bench Lite
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max41.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
PaperBench
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max93.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
VulcanBench v3
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max81.2%
Source
Not directly comparable
OpenHarmony Bench
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max60.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
FrontierSWE v2
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max15.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
LiveCodeBench (Vals)
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max87.9%
Source
Not directly comparable
SWE-bench (Vals)
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max85.6%
Source
Not directly comparable

Reasoning

MRCRv2
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max92.9%
Source
Not directly comparable
LongBench v2
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max66.3%
Source
Not directly comparable

Knowledge

GPQA
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash90.9%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max92.6%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max leads this result
GPQA-D
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash90.9%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max92.6%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max leads this result
HLE
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash36.8%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max43.6%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max leads this result
HLE w/o tools
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max43.6%
Source
Not directly comparable
GPQA Diamond (Vals)
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max93.7%
Source
Not directly comparable
MMLU-Pro (Vals)
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max88.6%
Source
Not directly comparable

Math

Apex
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash65.6%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max—
Not directly comparable

Multimodal

Chartography (tools)
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash78.9%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max—
Not directly comparable
BabyVision w/ Python
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash89.6%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max91.3%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max leads this result
ZeroBench w/ Python
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash49.0%
Source
Qwen3.8 Max49.0%
Source
Tie
MMMU-Pro
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max82.3%
Source
Not directly comparable
MathVision
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max95.2%
Source
Not directly comparable
MathVision w/ Python
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max97.7%
Source
Not directly comparable
BabyVision
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max82.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
ZeroBench
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max24.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
MedXpertQA (MM)
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max80.4%
Source
Not directly comparable
ScreenSpot Pro
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max84.5%
Source
Not directly comparable
Vision2Web
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max69.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
CharXiv w/o tools
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max88.4%
Source
Not directly comparable
CharXiv
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max93.5%
Source
Not directly comparable
OmniDocBench 1.5
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max92.1%
Source
Not directly comparable
OCRBench V2
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max74.2%
Source
Not directly comparable
CC-OCR
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max79.6%
Source
Not directly comparable
RealWorldQA
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max88.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
ERQA
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max77.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
SimpleVQA
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max75.0%
Source
Not directly comparable
PerceptionBench
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max63.5%
Source
Not directly comparable
Video-MME (with subtitle)
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max90.4%
Source
Not directly comparable
VideoMMMU
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max88.7%
Source
Not directly comparable
MMVU
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max82.4%
Source
Not directly comparable
MLVU (M-Avg)
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max90.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
LVBench
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max81.8%
Source
Not directly comparable

Instruction following

IFBench
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash—
Qwen3.8 Max82.8%
Source
Not directly comparable

Frequently asked questions

Which is better, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Qwen3.8 Max?

At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.

Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Qwen3.8 Max?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

Which is better for agentic tasks, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Qwen3.8 Max?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is not ranked on the public lane for agentic tasks, so no winner is named for agentic tasks.

Which costs less, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Qwen3.8 Max?

Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.

Which has the larger context window, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Qwen3.8 Max?

Both models list the same context window, 1M.

Related comparisons

Compare API pricing Read the methodology Open the model selector

Last updated September 10, 2026

Watch DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.8 Max

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.8 Max

Which one for your work

Coding work

Agentic work

Long documents

Chat turn cost

Cache-heavy agent loop cost

Repository review cost

What is actually comparable

Category results, on a stated basis

Agentic

Coding

Reasoning

Knowledge

Math

Multilingual

Multimodal

Instruction following

Shape of the matched evidence

What each workload costs

Chat turn

Repository review

Cache-heavy agent loop

Specification differences

Context window

API model ID

Cached-input rate

Documented inputs

Documented outputs

Provider availability

Reasoning profile

Weight access

License

Release date

Benchmark evidence

Agentic

Coding

Reasoning

Knowledge

Math

Multimodal

Instruction following

Frequently asked questions

Which is better, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Qwen3.8 Max?

Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Qwen3.8 Max?

Which is better for agentic tasks, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Qwen3.8 Max?

Which costs less, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Qwen3.8 Max?

Which has the larger context window, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Qwen3.8 Max?

Related comparisons

Watch DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.8 Max