Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) vs Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 16 shared benchmark results across 4 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

53.95/100
No comparison
N/A
1 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) #92 (Estimated); Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite share 16 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 22 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Flash (High); 5 to Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite.

Updated July 21, 2026
Shared results
16
DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) only
22
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite only
5
Comparable categories
2 / 8

Treat this as a split decision. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) makes more sense if coding is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill; Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is the better fit if agentic is the priority.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 16 shared benchmark results across 4 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite 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.

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.30 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.14 input / $0.28 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V4 Flash (High). That is roughly 8.9x on output cost alone.

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 DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
CategoryDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)ΔGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
CodingDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)68.5Margin← 14.3Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite54.2
AgenticDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)55.3Margin→ 8.1Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite63.4
ReasoningDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Not measuredMarginNo overlapGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite72.2
KnowledgeDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)52.1MarginNo overlapGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measured
MathDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)91.9MarginNo overlapGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)B · Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite

  1. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 56.6%B 54%
    Winner: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Δ 2.6
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) scored 56.6%; Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite scored 54%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins this benchmark.

  2. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 52.3%B 54.2%
    Winner: Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteΔ 1.9
    SWE-bench Pro: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) scored 52.3%; Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite scored 54.2%. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)$0.14 input / $0.28 outputGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite$0.3 input / $2.5 outputDeepSeek V4 Flash (High) has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Not availableGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Not availableGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)1MGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite1MListed context windows are equal.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 56.6%54%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
BrowseCompSource 53.5%—Not comparable
HLE w/ toolsSource 40.3%—Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 67.4%—Not comparable
ToolathlonSource 43.5%—Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 95.6%—Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 28.2%26.8%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
GDPval-AASource 32.4%32.0%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
GDPval-AASource 11471140DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
OSWorld-VerifiedSource —74%Not comparable
AA BriefcaseSource —634Not comparable
AA Tau3 BankingSource —16.5%Not comparable
CodingDeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteResult
CodeforcesSource 2816.0—Not comparable
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 78.6%—Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 52.3%54.2%Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads
SWE MultilingualSource 70.2%—Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 56.6%54.0%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
AA-SciCodeSource 42.0%40.9%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
AA Coding IndexSource 52.0%49.3%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
Reasoning
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteResult
MRCR 1MSource 76.9%—Not comparable
CorpusQA 1MSource 59.3%—Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 62.7%62.0%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
CritPtSource 3.4%0.0%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
MRCRv2Source —72.2%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteResult
MMLU-ProSource 86.4%—Not comparable
SimpleQASource 28.9%—Not comparable
Chinese-SimpleQASource 73.2%—Not comparable
GPQASource 87.4%—Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 87.4%—Not comparable
HLESource 29.4%—Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 37.5%36.5%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 86.7%83.8%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
AA-HLESource 27.8%17.5%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -22.3%6.9%Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 35.5%30.3%DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 89.7%33.5%Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads
Math
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteResult
HMMT Feb 2026Source 91.9%—Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource 85.1%—Not comparable
ApexSource 19.1%—Not comparable
Apex ShortlistSource 72.1%—Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteResult
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1238—Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource —79.0%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteResult
AA-IFBenchSource 73.5%—Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite?

DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite 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 coding, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite?

DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 68.5 versus 54.2. Inside this category, AA Coding Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite?

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 63.4 versus 55.3. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

DeepSeek Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 21, 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.