deepseek-v4-flash-0731 vs gemini-3.7-flash for code review
As of August 24, 2026, gemini-3.7-flash measures 0.931 on code review vs 0.869 for deepseek-v4-flash-0731 (+0.062), at 8.2× the price ($1.47 vs $0.1794 per 1K requests).
same suite, same items, same scoring — frontier v4, measured 2026-08-24 · method
| model | vendor | measured quality | $ / 1K requests | p95 latency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| deepseek-v4-flash-0731 | deepseek | 0.869 | $0.1794 | 41891 ms |
| gemini-3.7-flash | 0.931 | $1.47 | 12159 ms |
Code review asks a model to find what is wrong with working-looking code — a fundamentally harder measurement problem than generation, because a review is only as good as the defects it catches. The measured suite scores reviews against known injected defects with executable checks wherever the fix can be run.
These two are part of a larger measured frontier — what is the best model for code review shows every measured option for this workload, and other workloads rank these models differently: a model that wins here can lose on another kind of work, which is the whole argument for routing per workload rather than picking one model for everything.
Potion routes each request to the cheapest option measured at your quality bar — including picks this public page does not name. Get an API key or read the docs.