Data points: 58
Model compare
The readout for DeepSeek R1 and Gemini 1.5 Flash 002, before the detailed comparison sheet.
Weighted outcome: DeepSeek R1. Benchmark capability categories carry 80%, while price, API performance, and availability carry 20%.
Decision read
DeepSeek R1
DeepSeek R1 has the higher weighted result; Model A / B score 60 to 40.
Evidence depth
58 data points
Includes 0 benchmark rows, 0 audit samples, and 5 provider examples.
Selection signal
Start with DeepSeek R1
The charts below split 5 high-signal samples across speed, scores, and audit health.
Switch either side of this report to compare another model with the same LMSpeed data pipeline.
Select a different model to open a new comparison URL.
This report only uses LMSpeed data for DeepSeek R1 and Gemini 1.5 Flash 002: pricing, speed aggregates, third-party benchmark scores, and shared provider samples.
| Model compare | DeepSeek R1 | Gemini 1.5 Flash 002 |
|---|---|---|
| Overall leader | Leading | Contender |
| Weighted overall score | 60.0 pts | 40.0 pts |
| Benchmark category leads | 0 categories | 0 categories |
| Operational advantages | Cheapest input price, Free providers, Provider coverage | Average speed, First-token latency |
| Context window | 163.8K tokens | No data |
| Max output | 16K tokens | No data |
| Modalities | Input Text Output Text | No data |
| Features |
The overall result weights benchmark capability categories at 80% and price, API speed/latency, and availability at 20%. Recent test volume does not affect the winner, and missing benchmark categories are excluded.
| Model compare | DeepSeek R1 | Gemini 1.5 Flash 002 |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | DeepSeek | |
| Released | May 2025 | No data |
| Parameters | No data | No data |
| Tokenizer | DeepSeek | No data |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2024-07-31 | No data |
| OpenRouter ID | deepseek/deepseek-r1 | No data |
| References | No data | No data |
This report only uses LMSpeed data for DeepSeek R1 and Gemini 1.5 Flash 002: pricing, speed aggregates, third-party benchmark scores, and shared provider samples.
DeepSeek R1
DeepSeek R1 has these operational advantages: Cheapest input price, Free providers, Provider coverage.
Gemini 1.5 Flash 002
Gemini 1.5 Flash 002 has these operational advantages: Average speed, First-token latency.
Third-party benchmark profile synced into LMSpeed; only metrics available for both models are shown.
Compare benchmark category scores on a 0-100 scale. Select a category to inspect the gap.
Avg. score
DeepSeek R1
48.1
Avg. score
Gemini 1.5 Flash 002
-
DeepSeek R1
DeepSeek R1
DeepSeek R1
DeepSeek R1
DeepSeek R1
No data
No data
DeepSeek R1
Metric-level scores with benchmark source, rank depth, confidence, error, and evaluation date where available.
No shared professional benchmark scores are available yet.
Latest completed audits from shared providers, with four safety and integrity score groups plus report links.
| Provider | DeepSeek R1 | Gemini 1.5 Flash 002 |
|---|---|---|
| No completed audits are available from shared providers yet. | ||
Speed aggregates and input/output pricing share each provider row for real API selection and migration cost checks.
| Provider | DeepSeek R1 | Gemini 1.5 Flash 002 |
|---|---|---|
15 tests | DeepSeek R1 speed / latency 26 tok/s / 5734ms input / output No data | Gemini 1.5 Flash 002 speed / latency 155 tok/s / 1615ms input / output No data |
0 tests | DeepSeek R1 speed / latency N/A / N/A input / output No data | Gemini 1.5 Flash 002 speed / latency N/A / N/A input / output No data |
0 tests | DeepSeek R1 硅基流动/Deepseek-R1 speed / latency N/A / N/A input / output $1.10/M/$4.40/M | Gemini 1.5 Flash 002 models/gemini-1.5-flash-002 speed / latency N/A / N/A input / output $0.150/M |
0 tests | DeepSeek R1 speed / latency N/A / N/A input / output No data | Gemini 1.5 Flash 002 speed / latency N/A / N/A input / output No data |
0 tests | DeepSeek R1 speed / latency N/A / N/A input / output No data | Gemini 1.5 Flash 002 speed / latency N/A / N/A input / output No data |
Weighted outcome: DeepSeek R1. Benchmark capability categories carry 80%, while price, API performance, and availability carry 20%.
Text inputText outputTool callingStructured outputsJSON modeReasoning |
| None listed |
