Comparison page
DeepSeek V4 Flash vs Grok 4.3
Compare two current non-OpenAI premium options for agentic text workloads.
Side-by-side pricing
The table uses the same example request on both models so you can compare low-cost versus flagship premium text without changing the prompt shape.
Input 1,000 / Output 250
| Model | Input / 1M | Cached input / 1M | Output / 1M | Example request | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DeepSeek V4 Flash DeepSeek's lower-cost general model with cache-hit discounts for repeated contexts. | $0.140 | $0.0028 | $0.280 | $0.0002 | DeepSeek pricing |
Grok 4.3 xAI's current flagship text model for reasoning-heavy and agentic workflows. | $1.25 | $0.200 | $2.50 | $0.0019 | xAI pricing |
When to choose each model
DeepSeek V4 Flash
Choose DeepSeek V4 Flash when you want the economics or capability profile of DeepSeek and you can justify the published rate.
Grok 4.3
Choose Grok 4.3 when you need the second option in this comparison and want to test whether it lowers spend without hurting the workflow.
Use cases
- • Comparing cache-heavy apps with premium text quality needs.
- • Explaining why a cheaper non-OpenAI model can still be a fit.
- • Setting up model-routing rules for routine vs premium requests.
If the prompt is noisy or repetitive, run it through the prompt optimizer first.
If the brief is too loose, use the context engineer to tighten the instructions before you compare models again.
For the broader pricing strategy, read the LLM cost optimization pillar and the cost-per-million-tokens cheat sheet.
FAQ
Which model is cheaper?
DeepSeek V4 Flash is substantially cheaper on standard token pricing, so it is the lower-cost starting point.
When would I choose Grok 4.3?
Choose Grok 4.3 when you want xAI's premium model family and are comfortable paying more for the flagship rate.
How should I interpret the comparison?
Use it as a starting point, then validate the exact workload in the calculator because prompt length can change the outcome quickly.