upvote

points

by aabdi2 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby xynelius1 hours ago|
next
[-]
If that wasn't impressive enough, it's actually ~60x cheaper if you take into account the typical cache-read/input/output split in agentic coding, and the deep discount for cache reads offered by DeepSeek. Opencode has some public data on the typical split [1]:

For DeepSeek V4 Pro the typical split is 750 in, 290 out, 82k cached.

Cost per request for V4 Pro: $0.000875 per request.

Equivalent Opus cost (w/o taking into account cache write costs): $0.052 per request.

[1] https://opencode.ai/docs/go/#usage-limits

reply
upvoteby JacobAsmuth1 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Per token. You need to look at pricing per task.
reply
upvoteby trollbridge1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
... which still comes out cheaper, since DeepSeek caches so much more.

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.

reply
upvoteby swiftcoder1 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
How does it stack against the updated Deepseek Flash version?
reply
upvoteby pixelesque1 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
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.

reply
upvoteby swiftcoder1 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
yeah, I've definitely noticed one has to be quite precise to keep Flash on the straight-and-narrow
reply
upvoteby surgical_fire1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
I use a plan -> implement wotkflow for this reason.

pro plans, flash implements. I am super happy with how flash behaves like that.

reply
upvoteby k__1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Around 5 percentage points better. (E.g., 87% instead of 82%)
reply
upvoteby Gecko40721 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
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.
reply
upvoteby networked1 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
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.
reply
upvoteby trollbridge57 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
Interesting - I've been dropping into MiMo-V2.5-Pro-UltraSpeed whenever Flash seems to be "stuck" and it usually figures it out. I use UltraSpeed just because I'm so frustrated by then that I'm impatient.

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.

reply
upvoteby networked42 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
What about 5.6 Terra and especially Luna? Luna scores pretty high on benchmarks and seems to have different habits (like a denser pattern of tool use) and blind spots.

I'm trying out a development workflow where I generate mundane code with MiMo and Luna (and soon V4 Pro 0813?) and have Opus 5, which is running on only a Pro subscription, review and refactor it. I'm not sure it will justify the context switching, but it's an interesting exercise.

reply
upvoteby trollbridge11 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
Terra and Luna are fine, but they’re quite slow (OAI seems to be really slow lately) and don’t have the reasoning traces. My workflow really depends on them or I can’t switch models effectively.
reply
upvoteby saaga1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
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.

reply
upvoteby npn1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
I still believe this is not the full potential of pro models. I expect they will release another checkpoint later this year.
reply
upvoteby eli55 minutes ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
Opus 5 medium to Opus 5 max is only 3 points, if that puts it in context
reply
upvoteby k__1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
I tried the previous Pro model and in the end it was 50% more expensive than the previous Flash.

Wasn't worth it.

reply
upvoteby sparkling1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
deepseek-v4-flash feels so fast and snappy, i'm loving it. Happy to trade speed for the the 5% degraded benchmarking performance.
reply
upvoteby saaga1 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
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.
reply
upvoteby k__1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
I wouldn't exactly call it snappy, but faster than Pro, yes.
reply
upvoteby ericd1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Single request depth on vllm with dspark, I'm getting ~200 tps, I'd say it's pretty snappy.
reply
upvoteby JacobAsmuth1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Well sure but you're running on tens of thousands of dollars of hardware.
reply