Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813

openrouter.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 493 posts

Re: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813

#11

Post by k__ »

Gecko4072 wrote: post #9
k__ wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Around 5 percentage points better. (E.g., 87% instead of 82%)

So not worth it over flash? Even at ~7x the size it isn't worth the price hike. Flash may be a monster of a model due to all the RL it received from free usage everywhere.

I tried the previous Pro model and in the end it was 50% more expensive than the previous Flash.

Wasn't worth it.

Re: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813

#12

Post by sparkling »

k__ wrote: post #8
swiftcoder wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does it stack against the updated Deepseek Flash version?

Around 5 percentage points better. (E.g., 87% instead of 82%)

deepseek-v4-flash feels so fast and snappy, i'm loving it. Happy to trade speed for the the 5% degraded benchmarking performance.

Re: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813

#13

Post by saaga »

Gecko4072 wrote: post #9
k__ wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Around 5 percentage points better. (E.g., 87% instead of 82%)

So not worth it over flash? Even at ~7x the size it isn't worth the price hike. Flash may be a monster of a model due to all the RL it received from free usage everywhere.

Yea that's what I was thinking. Flash is nuts. I find I have to be a more precise and specific with it but damn. It's crossed a threshold of production grade coding for sure.

I was running a session over a couple days and it didnt cross a dollar lol.

Re: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813

#14

Post by k__ »

sparkling wrote: post #12
k__ wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Around 5 percentage points better. (E.g., 87% instead of 82%)

deepseek-v4-flash feels so fast and snappy, i'm loving it. Happy to trade speed for the the 5% degraded benchmarking performance.

I wouldn't exactly call it snappy, but faster than Pro, yes.

Re: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813

#15

Post by saaga »

sparkling wrote: post #12
k__ wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Around 5 percentage points better. (E.g., 87% instead of 82%)

deepseek-v4-flash feels so fast and snappy, i'm loving it. Happy to trade speed for the the 5% degraded benchmarking performance.

I feel the same too. I like the speed. I'm also a big fan of glm 5.2 fast. I can't wait for like 2000 t/s on these haha.

Re: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813

#16

Post by ericd »

k__ wrote: post #14
sparkling wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

deepseek-v4-flash feels so fast and snappy, i'm loving it. Happy to trade speed for the the 5% degraded benchmarking performance.

I wouldn't exactly call it snappy, but faster than Pro, yes.

Single request depth on vllm with dspark, I'm getting ~200 tps, I'd say it's pretty snappy.

Re: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813

#17

Post by pixelesque »

swiftcoder wrote: post #4
aabdi wrote: post #2

https://api-docs.deepseek.com/quick_start/pricing/ Competitive with opus 4.8 but weaker than sol or fable. About 20x cheaper.

How does it stack against the updated Deepseek Flash version?

I've found Pro to be a lot better per "task" than the recently released Flash for code reviews and things (via OpenRouter running in pi.dev).

Flash makes a lot more initial mistakes, and then has to re-check stuff, and produces much more output compared to Pro. It often gets to the correct result eventually, but the output volume is often 5x more than for Pro, and the initial outputs are often wrong, with the first few saying something wrong (like there's a bug, or the code won't compile when it does), and then saying things like "Wait, let me re-check:", or "Actually, looking at it more carefully:" and then it thinks a bit more and eventually gets to the right answer.

Re: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813

#18

Post by networked »

Gecko4072 wrote: post #9
k__ wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Around 5 percentage points better. (E.g., 87% instead of 82%)

So not worth it over flash? Even at ~7x the size it isn't worth the price hike. Flash may be a monster of a model due to all the RL it received from free usage everywhere.

I haven't tried DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 yet. Recent experience tells me that larger models are worth it in non-obvious ways. MiMo-V2.5-Pro solved problems that DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 couldn't solve for me: for example, adding a live counter for elided reasoning lines to a terminal-based coding harness. You wouldn't be able to tell from the scores on their respective Artifical Analysis page (https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/mimo-v2-5-pro, https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/deepseek-v4-flash). I like the DeepSeek V4 models, though. They critiqued my engineering decisions better than MiMo, and they seem to have a distinct aesthetic in the SVGs they write.

Re: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813

#19

Post by swiftcoder »

pixelesque wrote: post #17
swiftcoder wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does it stack against the updated Deepseek Flash version?

I've found Pro to be a lot better per "task" than the recently released Flash for code reviews and things (via OpenRouter running in pi.dev). Flash makes a lot more initial mistakes, and then has to re-check stuff, and produces much more output compared to Pro. It often gets to the correct result eventually, but the output volume is often 5x more than for Pro, and the initial outputs are often wrong, with the first f…

yeah, I've definitely noticed one has to be quite precise to keep Flash on the straight-and-narrow
Post reply on HN