Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 3.0x less per output token than DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 ($0.20 vs $0.60 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 2 benchmarks have a result for both.

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017DeepSeek
Coding
70.3
Overall
67.6
Output $/M
$0.60
2
Qwen2.5 7B InstructQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.20
0
vs boards won of 2 shared

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: which to pick

Only DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 has a coding score, 70.3 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Qwen2.5 7B Instruct for output tokens 3.0x cheaper ($0.20 vs $0.60 per million).

Shared results
2
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 only
37
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct only
5
Like-for-like categories
2 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 70.3 from 4 benchmarks, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
Math, 96.9 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
OTIS Mock AIME: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 99.4% against Qwen2.5 7B Instruct 2.5%, 96.9 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 $0.60 against Qwen2.5 7B Instruct $0.20 per million output tokens, 3.0x apart.
Context window
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 takes 1.05M tokens, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct 33K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017BarsQwen2.5 7B InstructTies
Reasoning10
Math10
All shared boards20
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index9 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
LiveBench coding96.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
LMArena WebDev1664Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)31.8%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)87.7%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Code migration (Vals AI)44.2%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
SciCode55.9%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
ALE-Bench1622.0Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
LMArena WebDev: React1667Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1687Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence Index39.5Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured118.5Only Qwen2.5 7B Instruct measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
Design Arena: spreadsheets1245Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
LiveBench research79.5%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
LiveBench browser76.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
LiveBench long agentic50.9%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)57.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)44.4%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)45.2%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)14.2%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)61.8%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
BALROGNot measured7.8%Only Qwen2.5 7B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Reasoning benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
LiveBench reasoning89.1%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)43.3%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)93.2%35.5%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Chess puzzles46.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Mystery game puzzles49.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Math benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
OTIS Mock AIME99.4%2.5%DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 371.2%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
FrontierMath, tier 446.3%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
SimpleQA Verified42.5%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
MMLUNot measured72.9%Only Qwen2.5 7B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
Design Arena: websites1311Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Design Arena: UI components1303Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Design Arena: game dev1357Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Design Arena: data viz1330Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Design Arena: 3D1358Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1332Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1242Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
LiveBench design83.4%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
Vals Index61.3%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
LiveBench data analysis79.5%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)82.7%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 measured
DTBenchNot measured47.7%Only Qwen2.5 7B Instruct measured
LMCANot measured6.4%Only Qwen2.5 7B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 41 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017Qwen2.5 7B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017$0.0004Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct$0.0002Fits in one request

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017$0.0093Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct$0.0056Exceeds the context window

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017$0.036Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct$0.022Exceeds the context window

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
SpecificationDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
MakerDeepSeekQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedOctober 17, 2026October 16, 2024
Context window1.05M33K
Input $/Mtok$0.15$0.10
Output $/Mtok$0.60$0.20
Coding index70.3Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it40
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct for coding?

Only DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 has a coding score, 70.3 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen2.5 7B Instruct for output tokens 3.0x cheaper ($0.20 vs $0.60 per million).

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs $0.10 and $0.20. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017, with 1.05M tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks is the DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct comparison based on?

2 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017's coding index rests on 4 independent benchmarks and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next