Compare AI models: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs GPT-5.6 Luna
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017DeepSeekHollow points use fallbacks · hover for details
- GPT-5.6 LunaOpenAI
ReasoningCodingCost efficiencyContext windowMultimodalTool use
| Model | Reasoning | Coding | Cost efficiency | Context window | Multimodal | Tool use |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 | 56/100 | 100/100 | 67/100 | 81/100 | 33/100 | 50/100 — Tool calling supported; no comparable benchmark |
| GPT-5.6 Luna | 69/100 | 81/100 | 58/100 | 98/100 | 50/100 | 64/100 |
Overview
Author
Context length
1M
1.1M
Reasoning
True
True
Input modalities
Text, Image
Text, Image, Pdf
Output modalities
Text
Text
Providers
Pricing
Input
$0.15/ 1M
$0.20/ 1M
Output
$0.60/ 1M
$1.20/ 1M
Cached input
$0.003/ 1M
$0.02/ 1M
MomentumLast 2 mo
Unique users
4.1K
371K
Completed sessions
33,636
2,038,561
Token share
0.01%
0.28%
Tokens
91B+100%
3T-40%
AUG 26OCT 20
AUG 26OCT 20
RetentionWeek 1
Returning users
Pending
56.7%32K user-weeks
Related comparisons. Other model pairs to check.
Nearby alternativeDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Jamba MiniDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017·Jamba MiniNearby alternativeGPT-5.6 Luna vs Jamba MiniGPT-5.6 Luna·Jamba MiniRelated comparisonDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Jamba LargeDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017·Jamba LargeRelated comparisonGPT-5.6 Luna vs Jamba LargeGPT-5.6 Luna·Jamba Large