DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) by DeepSeek or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning by NVIDIA? 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 32.2 points higher (45.1 vs 12.9) but costs 4.8× as much to run the benchmark ($445 vs $92.8; both mid-range class). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) when you need intelligence above 12.9, and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning when 12.9 is enough.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 45.1 | 12.9 | −71.4% Nemotron 3.5 Lightning is 71.4% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $444.60 | $92.76 | −79.1% Nemotron 3.5 Lightning is 79.1% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 16.16s | 8.97s | −44.5% Nemotron 3.5 Lightning is 44.5% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $1.20 | $0.06 / $0.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max): 71.4% less intelligence, 79.1% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 44.5% faster 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.
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh) scores 34.60 for $66.8.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max)Nemotron 3.5 LightningToday'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/nemotron-3-5-lightning · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017/nemotron-3-5-lightning?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill