← All models

DeepSeek · Last 7 days

DeepSeek V4 Flash

0–100 · higher means more positive community experience, not benchmark performance.

Updated 2026-09-15 11:52 UTC · 2026-09-08 – 2026-09-15 UTC
Community score73.8/100170 comments in 7 days

As of 2026-09-15 11:52:03 UTC, DeepSeek V4 Flash in the DeepSeek family has 170 explicitly attributed community comments in the last 7 days; its community score is 73.8/100. Available category scores include General text 70.5/100 (n=63); Coding 60.1/100 (n=10); Reasoning 70.3/100 (n=14). Scoring method and sources

Community reviews

Selected comments from the last 7 days. The balance of excerpts does not represent the share of positive reviews.

11 selected excerpts

PositiveSpeed & latency

“i get about 1.2k tps and 4k prefill with 2 of them with a kv cache pool in the native fp8 of 4.5m with my custom engine, with 8 slots you get about 80tps each so about 600 tps”

PositiveGeneral text

“I mainly use Deepseek flash.”

PositiveRoleplay / creative

“made good progress with the 0731 release of DeepSeek Flash”

PositiveGeneral text

“DeepSeek V4 flash is way better than GPT Luna ,I try them both”

PositiveCoding

“For my Django site, yes. DSV4Flash handles it with ease.”

PositiveCoding

“Quality I get is much better than what I paid anthropic/open ai last year”

PositiveReasoning

“DeepSeek Flash takes the spotlight”

PositiveRoleplay / creative

“I would personally use v4 flash 0731 than v4.1”

PositiveRoleplay / creative

“v4 is still more suitable for role-playing”

ZhihuzhMachine translated
Show original

还是v4更适合角色扮演

PositiveLocal deploy

“I have 4 Mi50s (32g) that runs v4 flash at q2 loading all weights in VRAM.”

PositiveSafety & refusals

“I myself am content with being gpu poor and being able to run deepseek v4 flash at q2 and 11 tps for now”

Explore long-term changes & analysis

Model lifecycle

DeepSeek V4 Flash

Released 2026-04-24 · Back to DeepSeek

Exact-version signals observed 2026-08-06–2026-09-14 · n=1,638

Data window: 2026-08-18 00:00:00 to 2026-09-15 00:00:00 UTC · Scoring method: experience_score_v2.

Trend history still collecting The current window is ready; 3 of 4 independent segments are available.

Lifecycle updated daily · latest complete UTC day 2026-09-14

Fixed 14-day baseline
67.8
n=528
Latest 28 days
68.7
n=837
Change vs baseline
+0.9
90-day slope
pts / 30 days

14-day rolling experience

Each daily point summarizes the previous 14 complete UTC days. The dashed line is the fixed release baseline; the verdict still uses independent non-overlapping 14-day segments.

14-day rolling experience from 2026-08-13 to 2026-09-15; latest score 72.6, fixed baseline 67.8.4050607080Fixed baseline 67.82026-07-30–2026-08-13 · 67.8 · n=5282026-07-31–2026-08-14 · 68.7 · n=6052026-08-01–2026-08-15 · 70.2 · n=6692026-08-02–2026-08-16 · 70.7 · n=7042026-08-03–2026-08-17 · 71.4 · n=7402026-08-04–2026-08-18 · 70.2 · n=7972026-08-05–2026-08-19 · 69.5 · n=8502026-08-06–2026-08-20 · 69.8 · n=9022026-08-07–2026-08-21 · 68.4 · n=9392026-08-08–2026-08-22 · 68.3 · n=8512026-08-09–2026-08-23 · 69.1 · n=7302026-08-10–2026-08-24 · 68.9 · n=6922026-08-11–2026-08-25 · 68.8 · n=6692026-08-12–2026-08-26 · 68.9 · n=6322026-08-13–2026-08-27 · 69.2 · n=6022026-08-14–2026-08-28 · 68.4 · n=5412026-08-15–2026-08-29 · 66.1 · n=4992026-08-16–2026-08-30 · 64.7 · n=4882026-08-17–2026-08-31 · 63.4 · n=4832026-08-18–2026-09-01 · 65.3 · n=4752026-08-19–2026-09-02 · 66.0 · n=4432026-08-20–2026-09-03 · 65.5 · n=4262026-08-21–2026-09-04 · 69.2 · n=4112026-08-22–2026-09-05 · 69.9 · n=4012026-08-23–2026-09-06 · 68.7 · n=3952026-08-24–2026-09-07 · 69.5 · n=3942026-08-25–2026-09-08 · 70.0 · n=3772026-08-26–2026-09-09 · 70.1 · n=3912026-08-27–2026-09-10 · 69.7 · n=4092026-08-28–2026-09-11 · 69.6 · n=4212026-08-29–2026-09-12 · 69.5 · n=4172026-08-30–2026-09-13 · 70.4 · n=4092026-08-31–2026-09-14 · 71.2 · n=3902026-09-01–2026-09-15 · 72.6 · n=36208-1308-1908-2508-3109-0609-1209-15

3 of 4 independent 14-day segments ready for trend judgment.

What explains the change

Experience change and discussion-mix change are separated. These are observational contributions, not proof of cause.

Largest negative experience contributions: Reasoning, Local deploy, Coding.

Category Baseline → current Category change Weight share Experience contribution Discussion-mix contribution
Reasoning Baseline → current78.0 → 64.3n=74 → 81 Category change−13.8 Weight share15.2% → 9.9% Experience contribution−1.73 Discussion-mix contribution−0.20
Local deploy Baseline → current64.3 → 61.7n=35 → 44 Category change−2.6 Weight share5.9% → 5.1% Experience contribution−0.14 Discussion-mix contribution+0.04
Coding Baseline → current69.9 → 69.8n=60 → 103 Category change−0.0 Weight share11.5% → 12.8% Experience contribution−0.00 Discussion-mix contribution+0.03
General text Baseline → current63.7 → 64.4n=179 → 295 Category change+0.7 Weight share32.5% → 33.5% Experience contribution+0.24 Discussion-mix contribution−0.04
Speed & latency Baseline → current67.8 → 73.0n=157 → 297 Category change+5.3 Weight share30.3% → 36.6% Experience contribution+1.75 Discussion-mix contribution+0.19
Image / vision Baseline → currentnot enough datan=0 → 3 Category change Weight share Experience contribution Discussion-mix contribution
Roleplay / creative Baseline → currentnot enough datan=9 → 7 Category change Weight share Experience contribution Discussion-mix contribution
Safety & refusals Baseline → currentnot enough datan=15 → 9 Category change Weight share Experience contribution Discussion-mix contribution
Video generation Baseline → currentnot enough datan=0 → 0 Category change Weight share Experience contribution Discussion-mix contribution

Unresolved contribution from categories below the sample threshold: +0.74 pts.

Lifecycle scores use the same experience-signal weights as the main index, without sample shrinkage after n=30. They measure public user perception, not model capability or backend causes.

How's your AI experience today?