Side-by-side comparison of pricing, 12 benchmarks, and generation speed.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Reasoning, Max Effort) | Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Input ($/M tokens) | $0.44 | $0.35 |
| Output ($/M tokens) | $1.32 | $1.4 |
Verdict. DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Reasoning, Max Effort) wins the overall benchmark matchup 2–0 across 2 overlapping categories, but raw benchmark score is only one input to the decision.
Pricing. Both models sit in the budget bracket for output-token pricing. At 0.9× the per-million-token cost, DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Reasoning, Max Effort) is meaningfully cheaper if your traffic is output-heavy (long completions, document generation, agent loops). DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Reasoning, Max Effort) makes more sense when output volume is low and absolute reasoning quality justifies the premium.
Strengths. DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Reasoning, Max Effort) is strongest on Coding Index (69.1), Intelligence Index (34.5). Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning) leads on Intelligence Index (6.7).
Speed. On throughput, DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Reasoning, Max Effort) generates tokens at 214 tok/s versus 63 tok/s — about 71% faster. On time-to-first-token, DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Reasoning, Max Effort) responds in 1430ms vs 2690ms, which matters most for chat-style UIs.
Provider. DeepSeek and Alibaba sell to overlapping but distinct developer audiences: DeepSeek tends to ship frontier reasoning models with premium positioning, while Alibaba often prices more aggressively. Your existing vendor relationships, billing, and SLA preferences may matter as much as the raw numbers above.
Workload cost. Workload scenarios (per million requests at 30M input + 15M output tokens): DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Reasoning, Max Effort) costs $33.00 ($396/year); Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning) costs $31.50 ($378/year). At a smaller 5M-input/2M-output scale (single-developer tool or prototype): DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Reasoning, Max Effort) ≈ $4.84/run, Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning) ≈ $4.55/run. At agent/realtime scale (200M input / 100M output per million requests): DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Reasoning, Max Effort) ≈ $220/run, Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning) ≈ $210/run. Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning) becomes more attractive at higher volume — the absolute per-token pricing difference compounds when you ship at scale.
Recommendation. Both models have legitimate use cases — the right answer depends on whether you are optimizing for benchmark ceiling, latency, or unit cost. Start with the cheaper / faster model, evaluate against your specific task, and only switch if the upgrade shows a meaningful lift.
Head-to-head deltas
Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks
Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning) is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $0.61/M tokens vs $0.66/M for DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Reasoning, Max Effort).
DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Reasoning, Max Effort) wins 2 out of 12 benchmarks compared to 0 for Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning). See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.
DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Reasoning, Max Effort) generates tokens faster at 214 tok/s vs 63 tok/s. DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Reasoning, Max Effort) also has lower time-to-first-token (1.43s vs 2.69s).
Choose based on your priorities: Qwen3 14B (Non-reasoning) for lower cost, DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Reasoning, Max Effort) for stronger benchmark performance, and DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Reasoning, Max Effort) for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.