DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 vs Gemini 3.6 Flash
Gemini 3.6 Flash comes out ahead, 73 to 68 on our weighted score, though DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 is 34% cheaper per token.
DeepSeekDeepSeek V4 Pro 0813
68/100- ECI155.4
- Price$0.66 / $1.98
- Context1M
- Our pick
GoogleGemini 3.6 Flash
73/100- ECI154.3
- Price$0.75 / $3.75
- Context1.05M
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Gemini 3.6 Flash is our pick
Gemini 3.6 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 73/100 against DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (68). It leads on inputs & features. DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityDeepSeek V4 Pro 0813Capabilities Index (ECI): DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 155.4 · Gemini 3.6 Flash 154.3
- Lowest priceDeepSeek V4 Pro 0813DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 $0.99 · Gemini 3.6 Flash $1.50 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGemini 3.6 FlashGemini 3.6 Flash 1,048,576 · DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 1,000,000 tokens
- Widest inputsGemini 3.6 FlashDeepSeek V4 Pro 0813: Text · Gemini 3.6 Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video
- Self-hostingDeepSeek V4 Pro 0813Publishes downloadable weights (MIT)
| Measure | Weight | DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 | Gemini 3.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 85 | 84 |
| Price | 25% | 50 | 42 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 45 | 100 |
| Context window | 10% | 60 | 61 |
| Overall | 100% | 68/100 | 73/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813DeepSeek | Gemini 3.6 FlashGoogle |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 155.4 (best) | 154.3 |
| ECI rank | #26 of 148 (best) | #34 of 148 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 91.7% | 94.1% (best) |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | 64.6% (best) | 59.0% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 98.6% (best) | 94.2% |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | 52.9% | 66.2% (best) |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.66 (best) | $0.75 |
| Output | $1.98 (best) | $3.75 |
| Cached input | $0.022 (best) | $0.075 |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.99 (best) | $1.50 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official DeepSeek API | Official Google API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 384,000 tokens (best) | 65,536 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes |
| PDFs | No | Yes |
| Audio | No | Yes |
| Video | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yeslow · high · max | Yesminimal · low · medium · high |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | OpenMIT | Proprietary |
| API model ID | deepseek-v4-pro | gemini-3.6-flash |
| API providers | 37 (best) | 25 |
| Released | Aug 12, 2026 | Jul 21, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Mar 2026 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813$10.56
- Gemini 3.6 Flash$15.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 or Gemini 3.6 Flash?
Gemini 3.6 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 73/100 against DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (68). It leads on inputs & features. DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 or Gemini 3.6 Flash?
DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 is cheaper at $0.66 input / $1.98 output per million tokens (official DeepSeek API price). Gemini 3.6 Flash costs $0.75 input / $3.75 output per million tokens (official Google API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.99 per million tokens for DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 versus $1.50 for Gemini 3.6 Flash (1.5× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 155.4 (#26 of 148) and Gemini 3.6 Flash 154.3 (#34 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (153.7–157.6 vs 152.6–156.3), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Gemini 3.6 Flash 94.1%, DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 91.7%; FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 64.6%, Gemini 3.6 Flash 59.0%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 98.6%, Gemini 3.6 Flash 94.2%; SimpleQA Verified — Gemini 3.6 Flash 66.2%, DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 52.9%.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 and Gemini 3.6 Flash yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 3.6 Flash has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 1,000,000 for DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813. Maximum output per response: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 up to 384,000, Gemini 3.6 Flash up to 65,536 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 accepts text; Gemini 3.6 Flash accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video. Gemini 3.6 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 publishes its weights (MIT) and can be self-hosted; Gemini 3.6 Flash is proprietary.
Which is newer?
DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 is the newest, released Aug 12, 2026. Gemini 3.6 Flash came out Jul 21, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini 3.6 Flash Mar 2026.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Muse Spark 1.2Three-way comparison
- DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 vs Muse Spark 1.2Meta · ECI 155.0
- DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 vs GLM-5.3Z.ai (Zhipu) · ECI 155.8
- DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 vs GPT-5.6 LunaOpenAI · ECI 156.5
- Gemini 3.6 Flash vs Muse Spark 1.1Meta · ECI 154.3
- Gemini 3.6 Flash vs GLM-5.3Z.ai (Zhipu) · ECI 155.8
- Gemini 3.6 Flash vs Grok 4.5xAI · ECI 154.0
