DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Max) vs Grok 4.6 (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Max) by DeepSeek or Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) by SpaceXAI? 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
Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) scores 9.9 points higher (44.2 vs 34.3) but costs 11× as much to run the benchmark ($2242 vs $200; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) when you need intelligence above 34.3, and DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Max) when 34.3 is enough.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Max) | Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 34.3 | 44.2 | +28.9% Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) is 28.9% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $199.63 | $2,241.91 | +1023.0% Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) is 11× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 18.12s | 37.48s | +106.8% Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) is 106.8% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.14 / $0.28 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image |
Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) vs DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Max): 28.9% more intelligence, 1023.0% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 106.8% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Haiku 5.5 (Xhigh) scores 41.20 for $158.
- Grok 4.6 (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Max)Grok 4.6 (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-flash/grok-4-6-xhigh · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-flash/grok-4-6-xhigh?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill