DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) vs Muse Ember (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) by DeepSeek or Muse Ember (Xhigh) by Meta? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-11-10.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick Muse Ember (Xhigh)
Muse Ember (Xhigh) vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max): 4.6% more intelligence, 81.6% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 48.5% faster end-to-end.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) | Muse Ember (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 32.6 | 34.1 | +4.6% Muse Ember (Xhigh) is 4.6% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $520.63 | $95.73 | −81.6% Muse Ember (Xhigh) is 81.6% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 18.42s | 9.48s | −48.5% Muse Ember (Xhigh) is 48.5% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $1.20 | $0.10 / $0.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
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 46.30 for $389.
- Muse Ember (Xhigh) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max)Muse Ember (Xhigh)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/muse-ember-xhigh · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017/muse-ember-xhigh?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill