DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) vs GPT-6 Luna (High)
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) by DeepSeek or GPT-6 Luna (High) by OpenAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) scores 12.2 points higher (45.1 vs 32.9) but costs 9.3× as much to run the benchmark ($445 vs $47.9; mid-range vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) when you need intelligence above 32.9, and GPT-6 Luna (High) when 32.9 is enough.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) | GPT-6 Luna (High) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 45.1 | 32.9 | −27.1% GPT-6 Luna (High) is 27.1% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $444.60 | $47.85 | −89.2% GPT-6 Luna (High) is 89.2% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 15.98s | 18.94s | +18.5% GPT-6 Luna (High) is 18.5% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $1.20 | $0.10 / $0.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
GPT-6 Luna (High) vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max): 27.1% less intelligence, 89.2% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 18.5% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
- GPT-6 Luna (High) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max)GPT-6 Luna (High)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/gpt-6-luna-high · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017/gpt-6-luna-high?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill