DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Underdog Saluki 27B

Overall
56
vs
Overall
33

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 is clearly better. It wins 52 of the 65 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. Under each score, the average time per test case on the machine it ran on. Underdog Saluki 27B spends 1.2× as many thinking tokens per test case.

Thinking tokensAnswer tokens
TaskAB
Overall
5626.0s
5.3K, 91% thinking6.9K, 84% thinking
335m 15s
Agents
5826.7s
3.3K, 71% thinking11.8K, 97% thinking
409m 2s
Structured Extraction
8117.2s
4.2K, 93% thinking4.4K, 92% thinking
433m 17s
Coding
4840.8s
9.4K, 95% thinking9.2K, 49% thinking
166m 54s
Grounded Answers
7119.8s
4.4K, 91% thinking4.5K, 92% thinking
433m 22s
Instruction Following
7625.6s
5.5K, 91% thinking8K, 94% thinking
466m 5s
Business Logic
6726.6s
6.6K, 97% thinking5.2K, 81% thinking
333m 55s
Security & permissions
4826.6s
4.7K, 87% thinking4.9K, 91% thinking
433m 47s
Diagnosis & investigation
020.2s
3.2K, 74% thinking8.7K, 94% thinking
06m 39s

What you'd run

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

SpecAB
Speed
243 tok/s
23 tok/s
Machine
Hosted
Apple M5 Pro, 48 GB
Memory at 32K
—
10.2 GB
Context
1M (better)
256K
Cost per run
$0.75
Not measured
Cost per case
$0.0049
Not measured
Time per case
26.0s (better)
5m 15s
Quantization
—
IQ2_XS
Harness
openrouter
llama.cpp

The race

3 lead changes

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

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017Underdog Saluki 27B
025507510050100150Perfect run5633

Every test case

153 test cases

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

52 won by DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 101713 won by Underdog Saluki 27B88 tied