Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)
76
Ornith-1.0-35B
67
Verified leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) #20 · Ornith-1.0-35B unranked
Pick DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Ornith-1.0-35B only becomes the better choice if agentic is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Agentic
+0.9 difference
DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)
Ornith-1.0-35B
$0.14 / $0.28
$0 / $0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1M
262K
Pick DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Ornith-1.0-35B only becomes the better choice if agentic is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 76 to 67. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.14 input / $0.28 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Ornith-1.0-35B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 262K for Ornith-1.0-35B.
DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 76 to 67. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 56.9% and 64.2%.
Ornith-1.0-35B has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 64.2 versus 63.3. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.