head-to-head
Qwen: Qwen3.8 Omni Flash vs DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
Side-by-side comparison of specs, pricing, benchmark scores, and task rankings. Updated 2026-11-07.
| Qwen: Qwen3.8 Omni Flash | DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Vendor | qwen | deepseek |
| Quality Score | 100 | 100 |
| Input Price | $0.15/M | $0.05/M |
| Output Price | $0.47/M | $0.57/M |
| Context Window | 1,000,000 | 1,048,576 |
| Max Output | 131,072 | 943,718 |
| Tool Calling | ✓ | ✓ |
| Structured Output | ✓ | ✓ |
| Reasoning Mode | ✓ | ✓ |
| Vision | ✓ | ✓ |
| Audio | ✓ | - |
The verdict
For a sample job of 1 million input tokens and 250,000 output tokens, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash costs $0.19 and Qwen3.8 Omni Flash costs $0.27, so DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is about 1.4 times cheaper for the same work.
Both take in a similar amount of text: 1,000,000 and 1,048,576 tokens, about 1,500 and 1,573 pages.
Only Qwen3.8 Omni Flash offers audio input and video input.
Pick Qwen3.8 Omni Flash if you need audio input or video input; pick DeepSeek V4.1 Flash if you need lower cost.
Costs use current list prices per million tokens; page counts assume about 0.75 words per token and 500 words per page.
Related comparisons
Anthropic: Claude Haiku 5.5 (batch) vs DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
Anthropic: Claude Haiku 5.5 (batch) vs Qwen: Qwen3.8 Omni Flash
Anthropic: Claude Haiku 5.5 vs DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
Anthropic: Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Qwen: Qwen3.8 Omni Flash
Anthropic: Claude Opus 5.5 (batch) vs DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
Anthropic: Claude Opus 5.5 (batch) vs Qwen: Qwen3.8 Omni Flash
Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 5.5 (batch) vs DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 5.5 (batch) vs Qwen: Qwen3.8 Omni Flash