DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max) vs Kimi K3.1 Pro
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max) by DeepSeek or Kimi K3.1 Pro by Kimi? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Kimi K3.1 Pro scores 15.6 points higher (55.1 vs 39.5) but costs 4.6× as much to run the benchmark ($3117 vs $672; flagship vs premium cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Kimi K3.1 Pro when you need intelligence above 39.5, and DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max) when 39.5 is enough.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max) | Kimi K3.1 Pro | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 39.5 | 55.1 | +39.5% Kimi K3.1 Pro is 39.5% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $671.96 | $3,117.31 | +363.9% Kimi K3.1 Pro is 4.6× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 15.03s | 49.55s | +229.7% Kimi K3.1 Pro is 229.7% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.29 / $1.20 | $2.00 / $10.0 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Kimi K3.1 Pro vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max): 39.5% more intelligence, 363.9% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 229.7% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
- Kimi K3.1 Pro is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max)Kimi K3.1 ProToday'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/kimi-k3-1-pro · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash/kimi-k3-1-pro?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill