ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Gemini 2.0 Flash vs DeepSeek R1 0528

Gemini 2.0 Flash comes out ahead, 67 to 53 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 2.0 Flash

    Released Dec 11, 2024

    67/100
    • ECI134.7
    • Price$0.10 / $0.42
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Gemini 2.0 Flash

  2. DeepSeek

    DeepSeek R1 0528

    Released May 28, 2025

    53/100
    • ECI141.2
    • Price$0.512 / $2.19
    • Context164K
    Full specs Remove DeepSeek R1 0528

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Gemini 2.0 Flash is our pick

Gemini 2.0 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 67/100 against DeepSeek R1 0528 (53). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. DeepSeek R1 0528 wins on capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityDeepSeek R1 0528Capabilities Index (ECI): DeepSeek R1 0528 141.2 · Gemini 2.0 Flash 134.7
  • Lowest priceGemini 2.0 FlashGemini 2.0 Flash $0.18 · DeepSeek R1 0528 $0.932 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGemini 2.0 FlashGemini 2.0 Flash 1,048,576 · DeepSeek R1 0528 163,840 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 2.0 FlashGemini 2.0 Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · DeepSeek R1 0528: Text
  • Self-hostingDeepSeek R1 0528Publishes downloadable weights (MIT)
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGemini 2.0 FlashDeepSeek R1 0528
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%5866
Price25%8249
Inputs & features15%8035
Context window10%6128
Overall100%67/10053/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Gemini 2.0 Flash vs DeepSeek R1 0528 specifications side by side
SpecificationGemini 2.0 FlashGoogleDeepSeek R1 0528DeepSeek
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)134.7141.2 (best)
ECI rank#130 of 165#108 of 165 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions64.1%76.3% (best)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics31.1%66.4% (best)
Price per million tokens
Input$0.10 (best)$0.512
Output$0.42 (best)$2.19
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$0.18 (best)$0.932
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 1 providersMedian of 16 providers
Limits
Context window1,048,576 tokens (best)163,840 tokens
Max output8,192 tokens32,768 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesNo
PDFsYesNo
AudioYesNo
VideoYesNo
ReasoningNoYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpenMIT
API model ID——
API providers216 (best)
ReleasedDec 11, 2024May 28, 2025
Knowledge cutoffJun 2024—
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Gemini 2.0 Flash$1.84
  • DeepSeek R1 0528$9.50
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Gemini 2.0 Flash or DeepSeek R1 0528?

Gemini 2.0 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 67/100 against DeepSeek R1 0528 (53). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. DeepSeek R1 0528 wins on capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.0 Flash or DeepSeek R1 0528?

Gemini 2.0 Flash is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.42 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). DeepSeek R1 0528 costs $0.512 input / $2.19 output per million tokens (median across 16 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.18 per million tokens for Gemini 2.0 Flash versus $0.932 for DeepSeek R1 0528 (5.2× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

DeepSeek R1 0528 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): DeepSeek R1 0528 141.2 (#108 of 165) and Gemini 2.0 Flash 134.7 (#130 of 165). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (139.0–142.9 vs 131.4–136.5), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — DeepSeek R1 0528 76.3%, Gemini 2.0 Flash 64.1%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — DeepSeek R1 0528 66.4%, Gemini 2.0 Flash 31.1%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Gemini 2.0 Flash and DeepSeek R1 0528 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, DeepSeek R1 0528 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 2.0 Flash has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 163,840 for DeepSeek R1 0528. Maximum output per response: Gemini 2.0 Flash up to 8,192, DeepSeek R1 0528 up to 32,768 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Gemini 2.0 Flash accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; DeepSeek R1 0528 accepts text. Gemini 2.0 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

DeepSeek R1 0528 publishes its weights (MIT) and can be self-hosted; Gemini 2.0 Flash is proprietary.

Which is newer?

DeepSeek R1 0528 is the newest, released May 28, 2025. Gemini 2.0 Flash came out Dec 11, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini 2.0 Flash Jun 2024.

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 Nov 2, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons