Qwen: Qwen3.8 Omni Flash vs DeepSeek: DeepSeek Flash Latest
Side-by-side comparison of specs, pricing, benchmark scores, and task rankings. Updated 2026-10-13.
| Qwen: Qwen3.8 Omni Flash | DeepSeek: DeepSeek Flash Latest | |
|---|---|---|
| Vendor | qwen | ~deepseek |
| Quality Score | 100 | 100 |
| Input Price | $0.15/M | $0.04/M |
| Output Price | $0.47/M | $0.89/M |
| Context Window | 1,000,000 | 1,048,576 |
| Max Output | 131,072 | 943,718 |
| Tool Calling | ✓ | ✓ |
| Structured Output | ✓ | ✓ |
| Reasoning Mode | ✓ | ✓ |
| Vision | ✓ | ✓ |
| Audio | ✓ | - |
The verdict
For a sample job of 1 million input tokens and 250,000 output tokens, Qwen3.8 Omni Flash costs $0.27 and DeepSeek Flash Latest costs $0.27, so Qwen3.8 Omni Flash is slightly cheaper for the same work.
Both take in a similar amount of text: 1,000,000 and 1,048,576 tokens, about 1,500 and 1,573 pages.
Only Qwen3.8 Omni Flash offers audio input and video input.
Across the 6 tasks where they differ, Qwen3.8 Omni Flash scores higher on 6 (Code Completion, Code Documentation, Regex Writing and others).
Pick Qwen3.8 Omni Flash if you need lower cost, audio input, video input or the stronger all-round task scores.
Costs use current list prices per million tokens; page counts assume about 0.75 words per token and 500 words per page.
Who wins by task?
| Task | Qwen: Qwen3.8 Omni Flash | DeepSeek: DeepSeek Flash Latest |
|---|---|---|
| Code Completion | 131 | 131 |
| Code Documentation | 131 | 131 |
| Regex Writing | 119 | 119 |
| JSON Extraction | 131 | 131 |
| Bulk Data Labeling | 129 | 129 |
| Short-Form Summarization | 123 | 123 |
Scores reflect capability match + benchmark data + pricing for each task. Methodology →