Birbla

Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

Sign in
  • Hacker News
  • Its a great update, I ran a benchmark comparing verbosity and intelligence compared to old weights.

    - Reasoning effort = 1 is now actually usable and produces 2.5x less tokens than old weights, without intelligence lost.

    - Overall 20% less tokens at each reasoning effort.

    - Same intelligence and same tool-calling pattern.

    More details in blog post https://sference.com/blog/deepseek-v41f-1017-benchmark

    by apejcic
  • I've been using DS v4.1 Flash daily for nearly a month now on Agent Swarm experiments. I've tested it against GLM-5.3-flash and Opus 5.5. DS 4.1 comes out tops for me. Opus 5.5 is still the smartest, but DS 4.1's speed and price more than make up for the "intelligence" gap. I've ran Chief/Builder/Reviewer swarms autonomously for multiple days. I think my new workflow is going to have DS 4.1 Flash do all the engineering and just have Opus review its work. 4.1 Flash really is a very impressive model. Kudos to the Deepseek team.
    by ilitirit
  • Hilarious sentence: "DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 is a minor update to DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash, delivering substantial improvements across reasoning, coding, agentic tasks, and visual benchmarks." (emphasis mine)
    by pmxi
  • I have both platform.deepseek.com (hooray off-peak pricing) and the $100/m Claude subscription and boy do I find myself mostly using DS-flash pretty much every time.

    There's something to be said for the speed with which it gets word done - I take fewer "it's compiling" breaks, and lose my train of thought less frequently. What's crazy is that the speedy work it does is pretty much always correct - which is a reason why I don't feel the need to spin up claude-code and "ask the expert".

    This speed & good-work combo is the DS signature IMO

    by TheArcane
  • so i did some apples to bananas comparison.

    i let 4 different agents review the same dirty code base (200+ files changed, c++, game engine):

    - deepseek v4.1 flash via deepseek API: took 20m to find one p1 issue that was relevant and a p2 issue that was irrelevant

    - glm 5.3 flash NVFP4 via TP2 DGX Sparks: took 1h 5m to find a p3 documentation issue

    - gpt 5.6 sol: took 5m30s for one p1 and one p2 issue. both relevant

    - gpt 6.1 sol: took 4m30s for two p1 and one p2 issue. both relevant.

    Worth to mention: none of those findings overlapped.

    I let deepseek v4.1 flash and gpt 6.1 sol both plan fixes for the summary of the findings. in this particular scenario: gpt 6.1 sol planned to increase a buffer size from 128 to 256 to fit the 191 elements that blew past a test scenario. it included some headroom. deepseek v4.1 flash on the other hand decided to make it exactly 191 to satisfy the test, for example.

    The TPS decode on deepseek is impressive. I never had a second / feeling of being left aone and though "damn this thing is working". Despite all my efforts, it took ~4x longer in a review, found less and planned worse than GPT 6.1 Sol. Wall clock time. I don't have token counts for comparison. If I were to grade those models from 1-10 (10 = top tier GG), I'd give deepseek a solid 6.5 and 6.1 sol a 7.5-8.0 maybe.

    by AmazingTurtle
  • The company's own news page: https://api-docs.deepseek.com/news/news261017

    They are showing this new version scoring significantly higher across multiple coding benchmarks, beating Sol 5.6 (6.1 is the latest) across 10/11 benchmarks.

    I am going back to DeepSeek for writing code. I was trying out using Sol and liking the result, but this should close a lot of that gap. I use Opus/Sol for an implementation plan and code review also use them for grilling. DeepSeek is also running verifications.

    by gregwebs
  • This model is why OpenAI and Anthropic want regulatory hurdles. We need more diversity like this, not less. A diverse ecosystem is the only long term solution to complex problems that I know of and the challenges that the AI world is presenting is no different.
    by jmward01
  • DS isn't better than Sol and Gemini in the benchmarks, but after working with them all for a while now I'm beginning to understand why people find DS _feels_ so much better.

    First, it's the tok/s and TTFT from providers. Deepseek blazes through work - at quite good quality - and you don't find yourself waiting for your agents to finish.

    Second is the openness. Being able to see the CoT and not being randomly blocked for cyber review. You're never wondering if it's stuck or if it will randomly fail. Combined with the great cost value.. My next subscription will probably be Z.ai

    by OsrsNeedsf2P

Explore Birbla archives