DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) vs LongCat 2.0
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) by DeepSeek or LongCat 2.0 by LongCat? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max)
LongCat 2.0 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max): 57.6% less intelligence, 22.5% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 123.5% slower end-to-end.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) | LongCat 2.0 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 45.1 | 19.1 | −57.6% LongCat 2.0 is 57.6% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $444.60 | $544.74 | +22.5% LongCat 2.0 is 22.5% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 15.97s | 35.69s | +123.5% LongCat 2.0 is 123.5% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $1.20 | $0.75 / $2.95 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
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.
- LongCat 2.0 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (High) scores 50.20 for $521.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max)LongCat 2.0Today'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/longcat-2-0 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017/longcat-2-0?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill