Model comparison

DeepSeek V4 Flash vs Qwen3 235B 2507

Data verified July 23, 2026

Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

DeepSeek V4 Flash

DeepSeek

58.88/100

Margin

2.9pts

← winning

Qwen3 235B 2507

Alibaba

56.02/100

0 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Flash #61 (Estimated); Qwen3 235B 2507 #78 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Flash and Qwen3 235B 2507 share 2 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 20 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Flash; 2 to Qwen3 235B 2507.

Updated July 23, 2026

Shared results: 2
DeepSeek V4 Flash only: 20
Qwen3 235B 2507 only: 2
Comparable categories: 1 / 8

Pick DeepSeek V4 Flash if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3 235B 2507 only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results across 1 evidence category; 1 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 has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 58.88 versus 56.02. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.

DeepSeek V4 Flash 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 Qwen3 235B 2507. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. DeepSeek V4 Flash gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for Qwen3 235B 2507.

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 and Qwen3 235B 2507
Category	DeepSeek V4 Flash	Δ	Qwen3 235B 2507
Knowledge	DeepSeek V4 Flash38.8	Margin→ 40.1	Qwen3 235B 250778.9
Agentic	DeepSeek V4 Flash49.1	MarginNo overlap	Qwen3 235B 2507Not measured
Coding	DeepSeek V4 Flash64.2	MarginNo overlap	Qwen3 235B 2507Not measured
Math	DeepSeek V4 Flash40.8	MarginNo overlap	Qwen3 235B 2507Not measured
Multilingual	DeepSeek V4 FlashNot measured	MarginNo overlap	Qwen3 235B 250779.4

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

A · DeepSeek V4 FlashB · Qwen3 235B 2507

GPQA
Knowledge
Source ↗
A 71.2%B 77.5%
Winner: Qwen3 235B 2507Δ 6.3
GPQA: DeepSeek V4 Flash scored 71.2%; Qwen3 235B 2507 scored 77.5%. Qwen3 235B 2507 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

Metric	DeepSeek V4 Flash	Qwen3 235B 2507	Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens	DeepSeek V4 Flash$0.14 input / $0.28 output	Qwen3 235B 2507$0 input / $0 output	Qwen3 235B 2507 has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per second	DeepSeek V4 FlashNot available	Qwen3 235B 2507Not available	A complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first token	DeepSeek V4 FlashNot available	Qwen3 235B 2507Not available	A complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokens	DeepSeek V4 Flash1M	Qwen3 235B 2507128K	DeepSeek V4 Flash lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic

5 benchmarks

Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Flash	Qwen3 235B 2507	Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source	49.1%	—	Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource	64%	—	Not comparable
ToolathlonSource	40.7%	—	Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource	57.8%	—	Not comparable
Gert LabsSource	54.35%	—	Not comparable

Coding

4 benchmarks

Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Flash	Qwen3 235B 2507	Result
SWE-bench VerifiedSource	73.7%	—	Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource	49.1%	—	Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource	69.7%	—	Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source	49.1%	—	Not comparable

Reasoning

2 benchmarks

Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Flash	Qwen3 235B 2507	Result
MRCR 1MSource	37.5%	—	Not comparable
CorpusQA 1MSource	15.5%	—	Not comparable

KnowledgeQwen3 235B 2507 wins

7 benchmarks

Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Flash	Qwen3 235B 2507	Result
MMLU-ProSource	83%	83%	Tie
SimpleQASource	23.1%	—	Not comparable
Chinese-SimpleQASource	71.5%	—	Not comparable
GPQASource	71.2%	77.5%	Qwen3 235B 2507 leads
GPQA-DSource	71.2%	—	Not comparable
HLESource	8.1%	—	Not comparable
SuperGPQASource	—	62.6%	Not comparable

Math

4 benchmarks

Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Flash	Qwen3 235B 2507	Result
HMMT Feb 2026Source	40.8%	—	Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource	41.9%	—	Not comparable
ApexSource	1.0%	—	Not comparable
Apex ShortlistSource	9.3%	—	Not comparable

Multilingual

1 benchmarks

Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Flash	Qwen3 235B 2507	Result
MMLU-ProXSource	—	79.4%	Not comparable

Multimodal

1 benchmarks

Benchmark	DeepSeek V4 Flash	Qwen3 235B 2507	Result
Design Arena WebsiteSource	1238	—	Not comparable

Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Flash or Qwen3 235B 2507?

DeepSeek V4 Flash is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 58.88 to 56.02. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 71.2% and 77.5%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, DeepSeek V4 Flash or Qwen3 235B 2507?

Qwen3 235B 2507 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 78.9 versus 38.8. Inside this category, GPQA 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 23, 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.