Compare / DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GPT-6 Sol
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GPT-6 Sol
46 results from 3 sources that measured both models. Each row is in the source's own units; there is no overall winner.
| Benchmark | Metric | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | GPT-6 Sol |
|---|---|---|---|
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Channel rules broken% of products | 1.8% | 0.6% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Claims to check% of products | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Content quality% of checks | 96.2% | 98.3% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Failed outputs% of products | 0.6% | 0.0% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Missing UK information% of products | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Not findable% of products | 3.6% | 7.1% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Publish-ready listings% of products | 47.0% | 76.2% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Reliably publish-ready% of products | 23.2% | 67.9% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Unsupported claims% of products | 39.9% | 3.0% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Unsupported claimsclaims per product | 1.25 | 0.09 |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Wrong attributes% of products | 20.2% | 13.7% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Wrong category or variant% of products | 2.4% | 3.0% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Channel compliance% of products | 99.4% | 100.0% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Channel rules broken% of products | 3.0% | 0.0% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Claims to check% of products | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Conflicts caught% of conflicts | 100.0% | 100.0% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Content quality% of checks | 96.7% | 97.8% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Cost per productUS dollars | $0.0061 | $0.0085 |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Decision accuracy% of decisions | 96.9% | 98.0% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Failed outputs% of products | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Field accuracy% of missing fields | 94.4% | 93.7% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Invented values% of filled values | 3.1% | 1.0% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Missing UK information% of products | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Not findable% of products | 3.6% | 7.7% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Publish-ready listings% of products | 63.7% | 75.0% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Reliably publish-ready% of products | 41.1% | 66.1% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Unsupported claimsclaims per product | 0.54 | 0.08 |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Unsupported claims% of products | 13.1% | 1.8% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Wrong attributes% of products | 20.2% | 14.3% |
| CatalogBenchmeasured by us | Wrong category or variant% of products | 3.0% | 3.6% |
| Arena (formerly LMArena)reported | Confirmed task successIPS effect estimate | 0.12 | 0.11 |
| Arena (formerly LMArena)reported | Praise over complaintIPS effect estimate | 0.03 | 0.11 |
| Arena (formerly LMArena)reported | SteerabilityIPS effect estimate | -0.03 | 0.15 |
| Arena (formerly LMArena)reported | Tool groundingIPS effect estimate | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Arena (formerly LMArena)reported | OverallArena rating | 1,471 | 1,424 |
| Arena (formerly LMArena)reported | Business, management and financeArena rating | 1,481 | 1,465 |
| Arena (formerly LMArena)reported | Creative writingArena rating | 1,440 | 1,451 |
| Arena (formerly LMArena)reported | Expert promptsArena rating | 1,518 | 1,507 |
| Arena (formerly LMArena)reported | Instruction followingArena rating | 1,478 | 1,447 |
| Arena (formerly LMArena)reported | OverallArena rating | 1,477 | 1,457 |
| Arena (formerly LMArena)reported | Writing, literature and languageArena rating | 1,455 | 1,440 |
| Artificial Analysisreported | Artificial Analysis Intelligence Indexindex score | 39.5 | 47.6 |
| Artificial Analysisreported | Humanity's Last Exam% of questions | 39.2% | 47.9% |
| Artificial Analysisreported | Long-context reasoning (AA-LCR)% of questions | 84.0% | 83.7% |
| Artificial Analysisreported | SciCode% of problems | 51.9% | 57.6% |
| Artificial Analysisreported | Terminal-Bench 4.0% of tasks | 26.8% | 43.9% |
Bold green marks the better value on that metric. Where a source reports ranges that overlap, the difference may not be meaningful; see the benchmark page for ranges.