Model comparison
DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) vs Gemini 1.5 Pro
Head-to-head evidence from 5 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) unranked (Not scored); Gemini 1.5 Pro #185 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) and Gemini 1.5 Pro share 5 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 40 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max); 1 to Gemini 1.5 Pro.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 5
- DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) only
- 40
- Gemini 1.5 Pro only
- 1
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) and Gemini 1.5 Pro is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 5 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.
Gemini 1.5 Pro is priced at $1.25 input / $5.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.14 input / $0.28 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max). Gemini 1.5 Pro has the larger context window at 2M, compared with 1M for DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max).
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 (Max) | Δ | Gemini 1.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)63.8 | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 1.5 ProNot measured |
| Coding | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)68.8 | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 1.5 ProNot measured |
| Knowledge | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)55.3 | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 1.5 ProNot measured |
| Math | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)94.8 | MarginNo overlap | Gemini 1.5 ProNot measured |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Gemini 1.5 Pro | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)$0.14 input / $0.28 output | Gemini 1.5 Pro$1.25 input / $5 output | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not available | Gemini 1.5 ProNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not available | Gemini 1.5 ProNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)1M | Gemini 1.5 Pro2M | Gemini 1.5 Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic15 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Gemini 1.5 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 56.9% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 73.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | 45.1% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 69% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1189 | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 47.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 31.1% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 95% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 34.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 831 | — | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | 39.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | 81.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | 31.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 22.9% | — | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | 35.6% | — | Not comparable |
Coding7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Gemini 1.5 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| CodeforcesSource | 3052.0 | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 79% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 52.6% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 73.3% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 56.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 56.2% | 23.6% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 44.9% | 29.5% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
Knowledge13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Gemini 1.5 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 86.2% | — | Not comparable |
| SimpleQASource | 34.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Chinese-SimpleQASource | 78.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | 88.1% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 88.1% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 34.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 40.3% | 10.0% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 89.4% | 58.9% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| AA-HLESource | 32.1% | 4.9% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -22.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 37.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 95.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Openness IndexSource | 50.0% | — | Not comparable |
Math4 benchmarks
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Gemini 1.5 Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 79.2% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) and Gemini 1.5 Pro on BenchLM yet?
Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.
Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?
BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.
What data is available for DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) and Gemini 1.5 Pro today?
DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max): $0.14 input / $0.28 output per 1M tokens Gemini 1.5 Pro: $1.25 input / $5.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.
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.