DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) vs Beam 1.0
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) by DeepSeek or Beam 1.0 by Reflection? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Beam 1.0 scores 5.6 points higher (30.3 vs 24.7) but costs 1.3× as much to run the benchmark ($319 vs $239; both mid-range class). Pick Beam 1.0 when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning).
| Metric | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) | Beam 1.0 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 24.7 | 30.3 | +22.7% Beam 1.0 is 22.7% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $238.91 | $318.73 | +33.4% Beam 1.0 is 33.4% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 2.61s | 8.02s | +207.3% Beam 1.0 is 207.3% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $1.20 | $0.40 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Beam 1.0 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning): 22.7% more intelligence, 33.4% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 207.3% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
- Beam 1.0 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning)Beam 1.0Today'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-non-reasoning/reflection-beam · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-non-reasoning/reflection-beam?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill