Model comparison
DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) vs GPT-4.1 mini
Head-to-head evidence from 18 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) #92 (Estimated); GPT-4.1 mini #152 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) and GPT-4.1 mini share 18 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 20 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Flash (High); 4 to GPT-4.1 mini.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 18
- DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) only
- 20
- GPT-4.1 mini only
- 4
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Pick DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-4.1 mini only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 18 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 3 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) is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 53.95 to 44.19. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)'s sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 91.9 against 4.5. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 78.6% to 23.6%. GPT-4.1 mini does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
GPT-4.1 mini is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.40 input / $1.60 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.14 input / $0.28 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V4 Flash (High). That is roughly 5.7x on output cost alone. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) is the reasoning model in the pair, while GPT-4.1 mini is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use.
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 | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) | Δ | GPT-4.1 mini |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)91.9 | Margin← 87.4 | GPT-4.1 mini4.5 |
| Coding | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)68.5 | Margin← 44.9 | GPT-4.1 mini23.6 |
| Knowledge | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)52.1 | Margin→ 12.1 | GPT-4.1 mini64.2 |
| Agentic | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)55.3 | MarginNo overlap | GPT-4.1 miniNot measured |
| Inst. Following | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Not measured | MarginNo overlap | GPT-4.1 mini88.5 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 78.6%B 23.6%Winner: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Δ 55SWE-bench Verified: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) scored 78.6%; GPT-4.1 mini scored 23.6%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 87.4%B 64.2%Winner: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Δ 23.2GPQA: DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) scored 87.4%; GPT-4.1 mini scored 64.2%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) | GPT-4.1 mini | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)$0.14 input / $0.28 output | GPT-4.1 mini$0.4 input / $1.6 output | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Not available | GPT-4.1 mini80 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)Not available | GPT-4.1 mini0.76 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High)1M | GPT-4.1 mini1M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) | GPT-4.1 mini | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 56.6% | — | Not comparable |
| 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% | 52.9% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 28.2% | 1.7% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 32.4% | 0.1% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1147 | 503 | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads |
CodingDeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) | GPT-4.1 mini | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| CodeforcesSource | 2816.0 | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 78.6% | 23.6% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 52.3% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 70.2% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 56.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 42.0% | 40.4% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 52.0% | 20.2% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
KnowledgeGPT-4.1 mini wins13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) | GPT-4.1 mini | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 86.4% | — | Not comparable |
| SimpleQASource | 28.9% | — | Not comparable |
| Chinese-SimpleQASource | 73.2% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | 87.4% | 64.2% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads |
| GPQA-DSource | 87.4% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 29.4% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 37.5% | 14.8% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 86.7% | 66.4% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads |
| AA-HLESource | 27.8% | 4.6% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -22.3% | -50.1% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 35.5% | 17.5% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 89.7% | 82.0% | GPT-4.1 mini leads |
| MMLUSource | — | 87.5% | Not comparable |
MathDeepSeek V4 Flash (High) wins5 benchmarks
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or GPT-4.1 mini?
DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 53.95 to 44.19. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 78.6% and 23.6%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or GPT-4.1 mini?
GPT-4.1 mini has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 64.2 versus 52.1. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or GPT-4.1 mini?
DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 68.5 versus 23.6. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) or GPT-4.1 mini?
DeepSeek V4 Flash (High) has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 91.9 versus 4.5. GPT-4.1 mini stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
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.