// head_to_head

DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning

Published LiveBench scores across all seven categories, live list pricing, context windows, and the measured cost of a point of capability — for both models, side by side.

OpenRouter + LiveBenchAll comparisonsFull leaderboard

DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning are priced within ~10% of each other.

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning does not have a published LiveBench run, so this comparison covers price, context and declared capabilities only. A missing score means "not evaluated", not "worse" — the right way to separate these two is an eval on your own workload.

deepseek

DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423

Blended / 1M
$0.111
Context
1.0M
Released
Apr 24, 2026
Overall score
65.5
reasoningtool callingprompt caching

nvidia

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning

Blended / 1M
$0.103
Context
262K
Released
Aug 11, 2026
Overall score
Not evaluated
reasoningtool callingprompt caching

Specs and pricing

MetricDeepSeek V4 Flash 0423Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
LiveBench overall

Mean of the seven LiveBench category scores, 0–100. Higher is better.

65.5
Cost per point

Measured benchmark spend divided by overall score — dollars per point of capability.

$0.0083
Blended price / 1M

3:1 input:output mix, the usual shape of production traffic.

$0.111$0.103
Input price / 1M$0.089$0.070win
Output price / 1M$0.177win$0.200
Cached input / 1M

Price of an input token served from the prompt cache, where the provider publishes one.

$0.018win$0.040
Context window1.0Mwin262K
Max output tokens384Kwin236K

Benchmarks by category

An overall score averages away the thing you probably care about. These are the seven LiveBench categories scored separately — DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 on top, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning below, both out of 100.

Agentic coding
37.6
Coding
69.2
Reasoning
70.6
Mathematics
79.6
Data analysis
68.0
Language
70.1
Instruction following
63.1

What each one costs to run

Per-token prices are hard to feel. These are monthly list costs for both models across five workload shapes, using each provider's published cached-input rate where there is one.

WorkloadDeepSeek V4 Flash 0423Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Support chatbot

1.2K in / 400 out × 200K requests

$30.34/mo$30.64/mo
RAG assistant

8K in / 600 out × 100K requests

$53.16/mo$56.00/mo
Coding agent

40K in / 4K out × 20K requests

$45.37/mo$55.20/mo
Document extraction

20K in / 1.5K out × 50K requests

$98.35/mo$83.50/mo
Bulk classification

500 in / 20 out × 5M requests

$203.79/mo$180.00/mo
Run these two through the cost calculator

Which should you pick?

You need to fit large documents in one call

DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423

Wider context window — 1.0M against 262K.

DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning FAQ

Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning?

DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning are priced within ~10% of each other. Nemotron 3.5 Lightning does not have a published LiveBench run, so this comparison covers price, context and declared capabilities only. A missing score means "not evaluated", not "worse" — the right way to separate these two is an eval on your own workload.

Is DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 cheaper than Nemotron 3.5 Lightning?

They cost about the same. Both land near $0.111 per million tokens on a 3:1 input:output blend, so price is unlikely to be the deciding factor between them.

Does DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning have a bigger context window?

DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 has the larger context window: 1.0M for DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 against 262K for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning. Note that a window you can fill is not a window you should fill — retrieval quality usually degrades well before the limit, and you pay for every token you put in it.

Do DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning support prompt caching?

Both publish a cached-input rate: $0.018 per million for DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 and $0.040 for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning, against full input rates of $0.089 and $0.070. On a workload with a long stable prefix — a system prompt, a tool schema, a retrieved corpus — that changes the economics more than the headline price does.

Related comparisons

How these numbers are produced

  • Price — provider list price from OpenRouter, refreshed every 15 minutes. “Blended” is a 3:1 input:output mix.
  • ScoresLiveBench release 2026-06-25, using their own category map. Each model shows its strongest published run. A blank means “not evaluated”, never “bad”.
  • Cost per point — the measured dollars LiveBench spent on the run, divided by the score it earned.
  • “Win” — awarded only past a threshold: one full point on a benchmark score, 10% on a price, 25% on a context window. Anything tighter reports as a tie, because effort settings alone move a LiveBench score by more than that.

Published benchmarks rank models on someone else's tasks. Before committing, see LLM & agent evaluation for building an eval on your own.