InferenceRate Live Token Economics
Compare Cost
Home / Compare / DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) vs Llama 4 Maverick

DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) vs Llama 4 Maverick

Live Unit Economics, Prompt Cache Pricing, TTFT Latency & Multi-Benchmark Analysis

DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) Specs → Llama 4 Maverick Specs →
🔄 Pivot Matchup:
VS
💰 Unit Cost Winner Llama 4 Maverick $0.20/1M in · $0.60/1M out
⚡ Latency & Speed Winner Llama 4 Maverick 135ms TTFT · 175 tok/s
💻 Coding (SWE) Winner DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) 77.4% SWE-bench · 94.5% HumanEval
🧠 STEM Reasoning Winner DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) 91.3% GPQA · 96.4% MATH-500

Which model is better: DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) or Llama 4 Maverick?

Llama 4 Maverick is 9.1% cheaper for input tokens ($0.20 vs. $0.22 per 1M tokens) and $0.60 vs. $0.65 for output tokens (1.1x cost advantage). In terms of operational performance, Llama 4 Maverick delivers lower response latency at 135ms TTFT (175ms faster than DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp)) with 175 vs. 165 tok/s throughput. DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) leads coding evaluations at 77.4% SWE-bench Verified vs. 62.4% for Llama 4 Maverick and 91.3% vs. 73.8% on GPQA Diamond.
Verified daily via automated API latency tests and official documentation.

Verified Performance & Unit Economics Delta (12 Dimensions)

Daily synchronized metrics across token pricing, prompt cache economics, latency, throughput, and 5 capability benchmarks.

Metric / Dimension DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) Llama 4 Maverick Net Delta / Advantage
Input Cost / 1M Tokens $0.22 $0.20 Llama 4 Maverick is 1.1x cheaper
Output Cost / 1M Tokens $0.65 $0.60 Llama 4 Maverick (7.7% lower)
Prompt Cache Read / 1M $0.007 $0.050 DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) is 7.2x cheaper
Prompt Cache Write / 1M $0.22 $0.20 Llama 4 Maverick is 1.1x cheaper
Context Window (Max Output) 1,049k (128k out) 1,049k (33k out) Equal Context Window
Avg TTFT Response Latency 310ms 135ms Llama 4 Maverick (175ms faster)
Generation Speed (Throughput) 165 tok/s 175 tok/s Llama 4 Maverick (+10 tok/s faster)
SWE-bench Verified (Coding) 77.4% 62.4% DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) (+15.0% lead)
GPQA Diamond (PhD STEM) 91.3% 73.8% DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) (+17.5% lead)
MMLU-Pro (Multi-Discipline) 87.3% 84.5% DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) (+2.8% lead)
MATH-500 (Quantitative Logic) 96.4% 91% DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) (+5.4% lead)
Inference Value Score (IVR) 81.6 / 100 77 / 100 DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) (+4.6 pts)

Interactive Monthly Token Economics & ROI Forecaster

Model production workloads across prompt, completion, and cached context tokens, or switch models on the fly.

25.0M Tokens
500K 50M 250M 500M+
5.0M Tokens
100K 25M 75M 150M+
50% Cached
0% (Uncached) 25% 50% (Typical Agent) 95% Max

Estimated Monthly Spend

DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) $6.09

$0.22/1M in · $0.65/1M out

Prompt Cache: $0.007/1M read · $0.22/1M write

Llama 4 Maverick $6.13

$0.20/1M in · $0.60/1M out

Prompt Cache: $0.050/1M read · $0.20/1M write

Projected Monthly Cost Reduction
$0.04 / mo
(0.6% lower cost with DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp))
Open Full Matchup Analysis →
A

When to Choose DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp)

Choose DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) (DeepSeek) for ultra-low-cost open-weight multimodal MoE built for high-throughput visual document OCR, chart interpretation, and real-time autonomous coding agents — offering a 1,048k context window, 310ms TTFT, and $0.22/1M input pricing ($0.007/1M cached reads).

Explore all DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) provider endpoints →
B

When to Choose Llama 4 Maverick

Choose Llama 4 Maverick (Meta) for high-throughput open-weight multimodal assistants, enterprise RAG, and low-cost cloud inference on Groq and Cerebras — offering a 1,048k context window, 135ms TTFT, and $0.20/1M input pricing ($0.050/1M cached reads).

Explore all Llama 4 Maverick provider endpoints →

Related Questions & Decision Factors

Which is cheaper: DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) or Llama 4 Maverick?

Llama 4 Maverick is cheaper at $0.20/1M input tokens ($0.60/1M output) compared to $0.22/1M input ($0.65/1M output) for DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp).

Which model has lower TTFT latency and higher tok/s throughput: DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) or Llama 4 Maverick?

Llama 4 Maverick delivers faster first-token latency at 135ms TTFT (175 tok/s throughput) compared to 310ms TTFT (165 tok/s) for DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp).

How do DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) and Llama 4 Maverick compare on SWE-bench coding and GPQA Diamond reasoning?

On SWE-bench Verified software engineering, DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) scores 77.4% versus 62.4% for Llama 4 Maverick. On GPQA Diamond graduate-level STEM reasoning, DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) scores 91.3% versus 73.8% for Llama 4 Maverick (and 96.4% vs 91% on MATH-500).

When should you choose DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp)?

Choose DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) (DeepSeek) for ultra-low-cost open-weight multimodal MoE built for high-throughput visual document OCR, chart interpretation, and real-time autonomous coding agents — offering a 1,048k context window, 310ms TTFT, and $0.22/1M input pricing ($0.007/1M cached reads).

When should you choose Llama 4 Maverick?

Choose Llama 4 Maverick (Meta) for high-throughput open-weight multimodal assistants, enterprise RAG, and low-cost cloud inference on Groq and Cerebras — offering a 1,048k context window, 135ms TTFT, and $0.20/1M input pricing ($0.050/1M cached reads).

Explore High-Priority Related Model Matchups

DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) vs Gemini 4 Argon
DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) cheaper Δ 19 IVR →
Gemini 4 Argon vs Llama 4 Maverick
Llama 4 Maverick cheaper Δ 14.4 IVR →
Claude 4.5 Sonnet vs DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp)
DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) cheaper Δ 25.1 IVR →
Claude 4.5 Sonnet vs Llama 4 Maverick
Llama 4 Maverick cheaper Δ 20.5 IVR →
Claude Opus 5.5 vs DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp)
DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Exp) cheaper Δ 23.8 IVR →
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Llama 4 Maverick
Llama 4 Maverick cheaper Δ 19.2 IVR →