Model comparison
DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) vs Grok 4.20
Head-to-head evidence from 5 shared benchmark results across 4 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) unranked (Not scored); Grok 4.20 #88 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) and Grok 4.20 share 5 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 40 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max); 13 to Grok 4.20.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 5
- DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) only
- 40
- Grok 4.20 only
- 13
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) makes more sense if agentic is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill; Grok 4.20 is the better fit if you need the larger 2M context window.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 5 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 (Max) and Grok 4.20 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.
Grok 4.20 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 (Max). That is roughly 21.4x on output cost alone. Grok 4.20 gives you 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 | Grok 4.20 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)63.8 | Margin← 16.7 | Grok 4.2047.1 |
| Coding | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)68.8 | Margin← 1.7 | Grok 4.2067.1 |
| Reasoning | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Grok 4.2053.3 |
| Knowledge | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)55.3 | MarginNo overlap | Grok 4.20Not measured |
| Math | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)94.8 | MarginNo overlap | Grok 4.20Not measured |
| Multimodal | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Grok 4.2070.1 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 56.9%B 47.1%Winner: DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Δ 9.8Terminal-Bench 2.0: DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) scored 56.9%; Grok 4.20 scored 47.1%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 79%B 76.7%Winner: DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Δ 2.3SWE-bench Verified: DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) scored 79%; Grok 4.20 scored 76.7%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 52.6%B 51.8%Winner: DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Δ 0.8SWE-bench Pro: DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) scored 52.6%; Grok 4.20 scored 51.8%. DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Grok 4.20 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)$0.14 input / $0.28 output | Grok 4.20$2 input / $6 output | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not available | Grok 4.20233 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not available | Grok 4.2010.33 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)1M | Grok 4.202M | Grok 4.20 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) wins17 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Grok 4.20 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 56.9% | 47.1% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| 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 |
| DeepSearchQASource | — | 62.8% | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 38.36% | Not comparable |
CodingDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) wins9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Grok 4.20 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| CodeforcesSource | 3052.0 | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 79% | 76.7% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 52.6% | 51.8% | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 73.3% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 56.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 56.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 44.9% | — | Not comparable |
| LiveCodeBench ProSource | — | 74.2% | Not comparable |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | — | 4.06% | Not comparable |
Reasoning5 benchmarks
Knowledge16 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Grok 4.20 | 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% | 88.5% | Grok 4.20 leads |
| HLESource | 34.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 40.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 89.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 32.1% | — | Not comparable |
| 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 |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 31.6% | Not comparable |
| HealthBench HardSource | — | 20.3% | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (Text)Source | — | 50.2% | Not comparable |
Math4 benchmarks
Multimodal6 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) | Grok 4.20 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 79.2% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) or Grok 4.20?
DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) and Grok 4.20 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 (Max) or Grok 4.20?
DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 68.8 versus 67.1. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) or Grok 4.20?
DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 63.8 versus 47.1. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
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.