DeepSeek-V4-Pro vs Ling-3.0-flash
Wins 6 of 7 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Math · Long documents · Following instructions
Wins 0 of 7 areas
—
DeepSeek-V4-Pro is the stronger all-rounder.Ling-3.0-flash is cheaper.
Scores updated · 25 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the seven areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own50DeepSeek-V4-Pro5 of 5 tests
- CodingWriting and fixing software41DeepSeek-V4-Pro4 of 5 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking30DeepSeek-V4-Pro3 of 3 tests
- MathCompetition and research-level math30DeepSeek-V4-Pro3 of 3 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10DeepSeek-V4-Pro1 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked10DeepSeek-V4-Pro1 of 1 test
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up11Even1 each
Long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
Ling-3.0-flash costs 77% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where DeepSeek-V4-Pro pulls ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+24.8points ahead
- Very hard expert questions across many subjectsHumanity's Last Exam+13.8points ahead
- Finds hard-to-locate facts by browsing the webBrowseComp+11.2points ahead
Where Ling-3.0-flash pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+50points ahead
- Long, multi-file coding tasks in real codebasesSWE-bench Pro+1.2points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 25 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingDeepSeek-V4-Pro
- LiveCodeBench v6DeepSeek-V4-Pro by 9.792.582.8+9.7
- SciCodeDeepSeek-V4-Pro by 8.850.842+8.8
- Terminal-Bench 2.1DeepSeek-V4-Pro by 8.66455.4+8.6
- SWE-bench MultilingualDeepSeek-V4-Pro by 3.876.272.4+3.8
- SWE-bench ProLing-3.0-flash by 1.255.456.6+1.2
AgentsDeepSeek-V4-Pro
- Terminal-Bench 4.0DeepSeek-V4-Pro by 14.614.60+14.6
- BrowseCompDeepSeek-V4-Pro by 11.283.472.2+11.2
- GDPValDeepSeek-V4-Pro by 10.532.922.4+10.5
- MCP AtlasDeepSeek-V4-Pro by 8.173.665.5+8.1
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingDeepSeek-V4-Pro by 2.930.127.2+2.9
ReasoningDeepSeek-V4-Pro
- Humanity's Last ExamDeepSeek-V4-Pro by 13.837.523.7+13.8
- CritPtDeepSeek-V4-Pro by 11.212.91.7+11.2
- GPQA DiamondDeepSeek-V4-Pro by 3.388.885.5+3.3
FactsEven
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationLing-3.0-flash by 505.955.9+50
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyDeepSeek-V4-Pro by 24.84318.2+24.8
MathDeepSeek-V4-Pro
- HMMT Feb. 2026DeepSeek-V4-Pro by 8.295.287+8.2
- IMOAnswerBenchDeepSeek-V4-Pro by 6.189.883.7+6.1
- AIME 2026DeepSeek-V4-Pro by 3.596.793.2+3.5
Following instructionsDeepSeek-V4-Pro
- IFBenchDeepSeek-V4-Pro by 276.574.5+2
Other results5 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- AA IntelligenceDeepSeek-V4-Pro by 10.330.420.1+10.3
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexDeepSeek-V4-Pro by 8.859.450.6+8.8
- AA-OmniscienceDeepSeek-V4-Pro by 7.2-10.7-17.9+7.2
- AA Agentic IndexDeepSeek-V4-Pro by 6.727.721+6.7
- τ³-Bench BankingLing-3.0-flash by 22628+2
Questions people ask
Which is better, DeepSeek-V4-Pro or Ling-3.0-flash?
DeepSeek-V4-Pro wins six of the seven areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning, math, long documents and following instructions. Ling-3.0-flash wins none, but costs 77% less. They are level on facts.
Which is better for coding?
DeepSeek-V4-Pro. It wins 4 of the 5 coding tests both models report; Ling-3.0-flash wins 1.
Which is cheaper?
DeepSeek-V4-Pro costs $0.43 per million input tokens and $0.87 per million output tokens; Ling-3.0-flash costs $0.07 and $0.22. That makes Ling-3.0-flash about 77% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 25 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 20 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 5 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.