Fronset Benchmark

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash at a glance

Good enough on 23/54 tasks at the Balanced step. Best value on 2 tasks. Best fit for: Financial Analysis & Trading Decisions, Relevance, Classification & Matching, Content Summarization & Synthesis.

Provider
DeepSeek
Model name
deepseek-flash
What the steps mean
Cost mode:
Qualifies on
23 / 54 tasks (at the Balanced step)
Best value on
2 tasks

Cost vs quality across all tasks

0%25%50%75%100%678910Quality score (6–10)Cost-efficiency vs best value (1.0 = best value)Multi Perspective Decision Synthesis — quality 8.07, this model IS the best-value good-enough option★Metadata Paragraph Rewriting — quality 7.94, 10.6x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionBench Hypothesis Post Generation — quality 8.40, 6.0x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionCapability Category Matching — quality 8.90, 5.2x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionEngagement Opportunity Triage — quality 8.38, 4.5x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionPublic Response Generation — quality 7.85, 4.1x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionTopic Cluster Labeling — quality 8.36, 9.1x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionSocial Post Portfolio Selection — quality 8.47, 15.4x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionContent Set Relevance Scoring — quality 6.81, 1.0x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionProfile Pool Matching — quality 7.90, 4.7x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionVoice Profile Generation — quality 9.11, 2.4x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionEvidence Grounded Claim Generation — quality 7.85, 1.9x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionStructured Content Summarization — quality 8.35, 3.2x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionProfiled Document Section Analysis — quality 8.99, 3.6x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionPersona Policy Eligibility Check — quality 8.95, 2.5x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionPublication Title Package Generation — quality 8.69, 7.2x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionProfiled Document Analysis — quality 8.45, 1.8x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionLanguage Identification — quality 9.97, 2.7x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionGenerated Content Relevance Scoring — quality 8.22, 4.0x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionPromotional Message Generation — quality 7.86, 3.0x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionBatch Text Translation — quality 8.83, 6.6x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionResearch Community Selection — quality 7.46, this model IS the best-value good-enough option★Structured Output Extraction — quality 9.25, 4.1x the cost of the best-value good-enough option

within ~1.3× of the best-value model · 1.3–2× · >2× · ★ this model is the best-value pick on that task. Top-right = best quadrant. Only tasks where this model qualifies at the Balanced step are plotted.

Per-task breakdown

TaskCategoryQuality (% of best)ConfidenceOverpay
Multi Perspective Decision Synthesis ★Financial Analysis & Trading Decisions92%MEDIUMbest value
Research Community Selection ★Relevance, Classification & Matching95%HIGHbest value
Content Set Relevance Scoring bestRelevance, Classification & Matching100%HIGH1x
Profiled Document AnalysisFinancial Analysis & Trading Decisions92%MEDIUM1.8x
Evidence Grounded Claim GenerationContent Summarization & Synthesis92%MEDIUM1.9x
Voice Profile GenerationLong-form Content Generation95%RANKED2.4x
Persona Policy Eligibility CheckRelevance, Classification & Matching97%HIGH2.5x
Language IdentificationRelevance, Classification & Matching100%RANKED2.7x
Promotional Message GenerationSocial & Promotional Content90%MEDIUM3x
Structured Content SummarizationContent Summarization & Synthesis94%HIGH3.2x
Profiled Document Section AnalysisFinancial Analysis & Trading Decisions92%MEDIUM3.6x
Generated Content Relevance ScoringRelevance, Classification & Matching94%MEDIUM4x
Public Response GenerationSocial & Promotional Content92%MEDIUM4.1x
Structured Output ExtractionStructured Data & Fact Extraction93%MEDIUM4.1x
Engagement Opportunity TriageRelevance, Classification & Matching94%MEDIUM4.5x
Profile Pool MatchingRelevance, Classification & Matching91%MEDIUM4.7x
Capability Category Matching bestRelevance, Classification & Matching100%HIGH5.2x
Bench Hypothesis Post GenerationSocial & Promotional Content95%HIGH6x
Batch Text TranslationInfrastructure & Utility96%HIGH6.6x
Publication Title Package GenerationContent Summarization & Synthesis95%HIGH7.2x
Topic Cluster LabelingTopic Organization & Clustering94%HIGH9.1x
Metadata Paragraph RewritingInfrastructure & Utility95%RANKED11x
Social Post Portfolio SelectionRelevance, Classification & Matching97%RANKED15x

Overpay — how much more you pay by running this model instead of the best-value model that meets the quality step on that task (marked ★). "16x" means you overpay 16× — the same output for 16× the best-value good-enough option; ★ means this model is that option (no overpayment). Confidence — how sure we are about the quality score (more judgments + more agreement = higher confidence): RANKED many independent judges scored this model's outputs and their agreement is very high (most confident) — HIGH many judges have scored it and they mostly agree (well-pinned) — MEDIUM enough judges have weighed in to publish, but they disagree more than we'd like (treat with a small grain of salt). LOW-confidence cells are hidden everywhere on the site. See the methodology for the exact thresholds.