DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Non-reasoning) vs Qwen3.8 27B (Low)
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Non-reasoning) by DeepSeek or Qwen3.8 27B (Low) by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-31.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Non-reasoning)
Qwen3.8 27B (Low) vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Non-reasoning): 15.1% less intelligence, 370.6% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 1374.7% slower end-to-end.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Non-reasoning) | Qwen3.8 27B (Low) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 18.5 | 15.7 | −15.1% Qwen3.8 27B (Low) is 15.1% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $310.24 | $1,460.07 | +370.6% Qwen3.8 27B (Low) is 4.7× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 4.11s | 60.61s | +1374.7% Qwen3.8 27B (Low) is 1374.7% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $1.20 | $0.50 / $3.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Non-reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Terra (High) scores 42.30 for $267.
- Qwen3.8 27B (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 54.50 for $1124.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Non-reasoning)Qwen3.8 27B (Low)Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017-non-reasoning/qwen3-8-27b-low · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017-non-reasoning/qwen3-8-27b-low?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill