Model Comparison
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning)
vs. Qwen3 235B A22B (Non-reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · DeepSeek, Alibaba
Recommended Pick
De V4 Flash (Non-reasoning) 17 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning)
100.0 value score
38.4 reasoning / $0.18/1M
Lowest Price
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning)
$0.14/1M input price
Best Reasoning
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning)
38.4 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning)
35.2 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning) is 3.2x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3 235B A22B (Non-reasoning).
Speed gap
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning) generates about 1.5x as many tokens per second as Qwen3 235B A22B (Non-reasoning).
Reasoning gap
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning) leads Qwen3 235B A22B (Non-reasoning) by 2.2 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning) leads Qwen3 235B A22B (Non-reasoning) by 21.2 points on coding.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning)
DeepSeek
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3 235B A22B (Non-reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick De V4 Flash (Non-reasoning) | Al Qwen3 235B A22B (Non-reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.14/1M | $0.45/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.28/1M | $1.80/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.18/1M | $0.79/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | DeepSeek | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Apr 24, 2026 | Apr 28, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 102.5 tok/s | 67.8 tok/s |
| TTFT | 1034ms | 1204ms |
| Latency | 1034ms | 1204ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 21.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 38.4 | 36.2 |
| Intelligence | 36.5 | 17.0 |
| Coding | 35.2 | 14.0 |
| Math | — | 23.7 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 71.6% | 61.3% |
| MMLU Pro | — | 76.2% |
| HLE | 7.0% | 4.7% |
| LiveCodeBench | — | 34.3% |
| MATH 500 | — | 90.2% |
| AIME 2025 | — | 23.7% |
| AIME (Original) | — | 32.7% |
| SciCode | 37.3% | 29.9% |
| LCR | 33.3% | 0.0% |
| IFBench | 47.2% | 36.6% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 94.4% | 27.2% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 34.1% | 6.1% |
Key Takeaways
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning) offers the best value at $0.14/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 38.4 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning) reaches a 35.2 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
V4 Flash (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
Qwen3 235B A22B (Non-reasoning)
- General-purpose AI
- Versatile applications
