Home › Compare › DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Mistral Nemo
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Mistral Nemo
A straight cost comparison of DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (DeepSeek) and Mistral Nemo (Mistral AI), per 1,000,000 tokens, verified November 2026.
Rate-by-rate comparison
| Metric | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Mistral Nemo | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / 1M | $0.30 | $0.15 | Mistral Nemo |
| Cached input / 1M | $0.006 | $0.015 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash |
| Cache write / 1M |  |  | Tie |
| Output / 1M | $1.20 | $0.15 | Mistral Nemo |
| Context window | 1,100,000 | 128,000 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash |
| Batch API | No | Yes | Mistral Nemo |
| Long-context tier | None | None |  |
For per-token metrics, the lower number wins. For context window and batch support, the higher or broader option wins. A dash means the provider does not publish that rate: a missing cache-write fee means writes are not billed per token, while a missing cached-input rate means cache hits bill at the full input rate.
Blended cost: 1M input + 250K output
| Model | Blended cost | Difference |
|---|---|---|
| DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | $0.60 | +$0.412 |
| Mistral Nemo | $0.188 | Cheaper |
Ten workloads, two bills
The same two models, priced across ten workloads that differ only in their input:output ratio. Nothing else changes  no retries, no system prompt, no middleware.
| Workload | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Mistral Nemo | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Classification 100K reqs · 500 in / 10 out | $16.20 | $7.65 | Mistral Nemo |
| Data extraction 10K reqs · 2K in / 200 out | $8.40 | $3.30 | Mistral Nemo |
| Support chat 1K reqs · 4K in / 600 out | $1.92 | $0.69 | Mistral Nemo |
| Code review 2K reqs · 8K in / 1.5K out | $8.40 | $2.85 | Mistral Nemo |
| Summarisation 1K reqs · 20K in / 1K out | $7.20 | $3.15 | Mistral Nemo |
| Agent loop 5K reqs · 12K in / 2K out | $30 | $10.50 | Mistral Nemo |
| Translation 500 reqs · 15K in / 15K out | $11.25 | $2.25 | Mistral Nemo |
| Long-document QA 200 reqs · 120K in / 800 out | $7.39 | $3.62 | Mistral Nemo |
| Cached RAG 1K reqs · 50K in (45K cached) / 1K out | $2.98 | $1.58 | Mistral Nemo |
| Nightly batch 10K reqs · 10K in / 2K out | $54 | $9 | Mistral Nemo |
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash wins 0 of 10, Mistral Nemo wins 10 of 10. The winner is set by the token mix, not by the headline rate.
Where the two bills cross over
Mistral Nemo is cheaper on both sides of the mix: $0.15 vs $0.30 per million input tokens, and $0.15 vs $1.20 per million output. No input:output ratio reverses that, so on price alone the other model never becomes the better choice  it has to win on context, latency or output quality.
Cost at four scales
The same support-chat workload (4K input, 600 output per request) at four monthly volumes.
| Requests / month | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Mistral Nemo | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| 100 | $0.192 | $0.069 | Mistral Nemo cheaper by $0.123 |
| 1,000 | $1.92 | $0.69 | Mistral Nemo cheaper by $1.23 |
| 10,000 | $19.20 | $6.90 | Mistral Nemo cheaper by $12.30 |
| 100,000 | $192 | $69 | Mistral Nemo cheaper by $123 |
What caching does to each bill
Caching only helps the part of the prompt that repeats. This is the support-chat workload (1,000 requests, 4,000 input tokens each) with an increasing share of that prompt served from a warm cache, written once on the first request.
| Cached share of the prompt | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Mistral Nemo | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0% | $1.92 | $0.69 | Mistral Nemo |
| 50% | $1.33 | $0.42 | Mistral Nemo |
| 80% | $0.98 | $0.258 | Mistral Nemo |
| 95% | $0.804 | $0.178 | Mistral Nemo |
Both models publish a cached-read rate, so the discount is comparable: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash reads cache at $0.006 per million, Mistral Nemo at $0.015.
Which one should you pick?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash wins on none of the ten workloads above, while Mistral Nemo wins on classification, data extraction, support chat, code review, summarisation, agent loop, translation, long-document qa, cached rag, nightly batch.
Beyond price, the two differ on input rate ($0.30 vs $0.15); output rate ($1.20 vs $0.15); cached-input rate ($0.006 vs $0.015); context window (1,100,000 vs 128,000); batch support (no vs yes).
Batch mode is available on Mistral Nemo, which halves the nightly job. Both publish cached-input discounts, so a stable system prompt is worth caching on either.
FAQ
Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash cheaper than Mistral Nemo?
On a blended 1M-input-plus-250K-output workload, Mistral Nemo is cheaper by 69% ($0.188 vs $0.60). The gap changes for cache-heavy prompts and for batch jobs, as the workload table shows.
Which handles longer prompts, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Mistral Nemo?
Mistral Nemo has the larger context window (1,100,000 vs 128,000 tokens). Neither model publishes a long-context surcharge.
Do both models support prompt caching?
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash bills cached reads at $0.006 per 1M; Mistral Nemo at $0.015.
Related comparisons
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs DeepSeek V4 Pro
- Mistral Small vs Mistral Nemo
- Mistral Large vs Mistral Nemo
- All DeepSeek pricing
- All Mistral AI pricing