51–60 of 493 posts
https://api-docs.deepseek.com/quick_start/pricing/ Competitive with opus 4.8 but weaker than sol or fable. About 20x cheaper.
Per token. You need to look at pricing per task.
I keep track of my token consumption even on subscription plans and my equiv. cost for my 5.6-Sol usage is around $4000-$8000 a month.
Benchmarks: | Benchmark | DS-V4-Pro | DS-V4-Flash | DS-V4-Pro | DS-V4-Flash | GLM-5.2 | Kimi-K3 | Opus-4.8 | Fable 5 | | | 0813 | 0731 | Preview | Preview | | | | (w/ fallback) | |--------------------------|-----------|-------------|-----------|-------------|-----------|-----------|-----------|---------------| | HLE (wo/w tools) | 42.7/60.0 | 37.8/51.5 | 37.7/48.2 | 34.8/45.1 | 40.5/54.7 | 43.5/56.0 | 49.8/57.9 | 53.…
The timing looks like they are trying to take the wind out of Qwen's sails by releasing this on the same day that Qwen released the weights of Qwen3.8-max. Or maybe it's coincidence... For comparison I looked at Qwen's claimed benchmarks for Qwen3.8-max ( https://qwen.ai/blog?id=qwen3.8 ). Assuming each published set of benchmarks is believable, it looks like v4 Pro 0813 is better on average but overall performance i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So it's a Fable class LLM? DSV4Pro vs Fable5 HLE w tools 60.0 vs 63.0 Terminal Bench 2.1 87.9 vs 88.0 Cybergym 83.3 vs 83.1 DeepSWE 62.7 vs 70.0 Toolathlon-Verified 74.1 vs 77.9 AutomationBench (Public) 31.8 vs 29.1 DSBench-FullStack 71.1 vs 77.2 DSBench-Hard 67.2 vs 68.3
Fable's guardrails would never let it do something like Cybergym so at least for that one it's measuring Opus 5
> Mythos 5 reproduced 83.8% of targeted vulnerabilities on a single try, and produced at least one crash in 99.4% of tasks. This is comparable to Claude Mythos Preview, which reproduced 83.1% of targeted vulnerabilities and produced a crash in 97.1% of tasks. By contrast, Claude Opus 4.8 achieved a score of 78.1% (95.7% any crash).
So their quoted figure exactly matches the figure for Mythos Preview, although they don't state the provenance. It could also quite possibly be an independent measurement of Opus 5.
[1]: https://www-cdn.anthropic.com/57a52ea7d8f0e54e8a542e90826608...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.a…
I still find 5.6-Sol can solve some things neither of those can, but it's so slow (and it's so hard to trace / debug the reasoning) that I just let it run overnight.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The timing looks like they are trying to take the wind out of Qwen's sails by releasing this on the same day that Qwen released the weights of Qwen3.8-max. Or maybe it's coincidence... For comparison I looked at Qwen's claimed benchmarks for Qwen3.8-max ( https://qwen.ai/blog?id=qwen3.8 ). Assuming each published set of benchmarks is believable, it looks like v4 Pro 0813 is better on average but overall performance i…
By that standard, the release of Grok 4.6 was also timed on the same day. Given how I think DeepSeek operates... I think they just release it when they feel it's ready, and don't even seem that concerned with what other people are doing.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://api-docs.deepseek.com/quick_start/pricing/ edit: there are banner announcements saying v4 flash pricing will increase first then overall by an undetermined amount
i dont see any price increase there... what am i missing?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://api-docs.deepseek.com/quick_start/pricing/ edit: there are banner announcements saying v4 flash pricing will increase first then overall by an undetermined amount
i dont see any price increase there... what am i missing?
[0] https://finance.yahoo.com/technology/ai/articles/deepseek-pl...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The timing looks like they are trying to take the wind out of Qwen's sails by releasing this on the same day that Qwen released the weights of Qwen3.8-max. Or maybe it's coincidence... For comparison I looked at Qwen's claimed benchmarks for Qwen3.8-max ( https://qwen.ai/blog?id=qwen3.8 ). Assuming each published set of benchmarks is believable, it looks like v4 Pro 0813 is better on average but overall performance i…
Official pricing only kinda matters for an open weight model, no?