Clover 35B A3B Preview vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017

Overall
30
vs
Overall
56

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 is clearly better. It wins 59 of the 69 test cases where they differ.

Learn to build evals like this in the AI Engineering Academy

Task by task

A score turns orange only when that model wins clearly more of the task's test cases. The time under each score is the average per test case, on the machine it ran on. Clover 35B A3B Preview spends 1.7× as many thinking tokens per test case.

Thinking tokensAnswer tokens
TaskAB
Overall
3035.1s
8.4K, 95% thinking5.3K, 91% thinking
5626.0s
Agents
2036.8s
9.6K, 91% thinking3.3K, 71% thinking
5826.7s
Structured Extraction
4327.5s
7.2K, 97% thinking4.2K, 93% thinking
8117.2s
Coding
101m 5s
12.2K, 100% thinking9.4K, 95% thinking
4840.8s
Grounded Answers
4821.0s
5.4K, 94% thinking4.4K, 91% thinking
7119.8s
Instruction Following
5332.8s
9.2K, 95% thinking5.5K, 91% thinking
7625.6s
Business Logic
1936.1s
9.8K, 99% thinking6.6K, 97% thinking
6726.6s
Security & permissions
4725.6s
5.8K, 92% thinking4.7K, 87% thinking
4826.6s
Diagnosis & investigation
037.0s
7K, 82% thinking3.2K, 74% thinking
020.2s

What you'd run

The build behind each score. Orange marks the faster, smaller, cheaper or longer-context side.

SpecAB
Speed
252 tok/s (better)
243 tok/s
Machine
Hosted
Hosted
Memory at 32K
—
—
Context
—
1M
Cost per run
Not measured
$0.75
Cost per case
Not measured
$0.0049
Time per case
35.1s
26.0s (better)
Quantization
—
—
Harness
custom
openrouter

The race

No lead changes

Each model's running score as the test cases go by. The dashed line is a perfect run.

Clover 35B A3B PreviewDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
0255075100501001503056

Every test case

153 test cases

Each square is one test case, colored by the model that scored higher.

10 won by Clover 35B A3B Preview59 won by DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 101784 tied