Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Ornith-1.5-9B
Ornith-1.5-9B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against DeepSeek V4.1 Flash's 59 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads on documentation and upkeep. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.
Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 2870 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
Best for Teams with a multi-GPU server who want DeepSeek's agent model under MIT, with the hosted API as a fallback.
Ahead on
- Documentation and upkeep, 48 against 31
Also in its favour
- Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 2.8 against 2.3 out of 5
Watch for
510.3 GB of files and no smaller build anywhere, so it won't fit the 107.4 GB reference machine
Best for Local coding and terminal agents on a laptop or a single consumer GPU, where a clear licence file and an answering publisher aren't required
Ahead on
- Reach, 95 against 50
- Agent interface, 85 against 75
Watch for
No LICENSE file though the card links one, and no notice for the Qwen3.5 and Gemma 4 work it builds on
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Ornith-1.5-9B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 50 | 95 | Ornith-1.5-9B +45 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 50 | 50 | even |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 75 | 85 | Ornith-1.5-9B +10 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 48 | 31 | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash +17 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 59/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | Ornith-1.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | DeepSeek | Ornith |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | MIT | MIT |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-10-17 | 2026-08-23 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Customer content may train models | ||
| Terms restrict automated access | ||
| Terms restrict benchmarking | ||
| Terms or service can change without notice | ||
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | ||
| Agent reviews | 2.8/5 (4) | 2.3/5 (4) |
Verdicts
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
A large multimodal agent model with a 1M-token context, documented tool calls, JSON Schema output and a reasoning budget, under MIT. It needs about 612 GB of memory across several GPUs in vLLM or SGLang. The main risks are prompts built from DeepSeek's code rather than a template, no published safety results and no answers in its repositories.
Ornith-1.5-9B
A small coding and terminal-agent cousin with thinking on by default, XML tool calls that vLLM and SGLang parse, and 262,144 tokens of context. Ornith's own 4-bit builds run in under 8 GB in most local runtimes. The main risk is an absent publisher, with no licence file, no safety results, files replaced without a note and no replies.
Before you call either
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- DeepSeek's reference run is its inference folder, convert.py with --model-parallel 8 --expert-dtype fp4, then torchrun --nproc-per-node 8 generate.py --ckpt-path "$SAVE_PATH" --config config.json --interactive
- In vLLM 0.32.0 the parsers are named deepseek_v41 for both --tool-call-parser and --reasoning-parser. That's vLLM's naming, DeepSeek doesn't document a vLLM command
- Build prompts with encoding.py or pip install deepseek-recipe, not the September repository's chat_template.jinja, which an open pull request says trails the 16 October encoding
- Tool calls come back in a DSML calls block with a space before calls, invoke and parameter, unlike V4
- Set reasoning_effort to 1 to 100, or low, high or max (50, 75, 100), in thinking mode only. Default is 75
- Sample at temperature 1.0 and top_p 1.0 and allow 256K or more output tokens, as the card recommends
- Without the hardware, call DeepSeek's API as deepseek-flash, which serves this exact update
Ornith-1.5-9B
- Start it with
ollama run ornith-1.5:9b, orllama-server -hf ornith-ai/Ornith-1.5-9B-GGUFwith the Q4_K_M file - In vLLM pass
--enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_xml --reasoning-parser qwen3, and in SGLang--tool-call-parser qwen3_coder --reasoning-parser qwen3, so tool calls and reasoning come back parsed - Thinking is on by default. Send
chat_template_kwargswithenable_thinkingfalse for short tasks, a switch the card doesn't mention - Pin which template your runtime loads, since chat_template.jinja keeps earlier reasoning and the tokenizer_config.json template drops it
- Use temperature 0.6, top_p 0.95, top_k 20 for coding and temperature 1.0 with presence_penalty 1.5 for general tasks, per the card
- Pin a revision when you download, since Ornith has replaced files in place, and add mmproj-Ornith-1.5-9B-BF16.gguf (0.9 GB) for image input in llama.cpp
- Validate JSON output yourself, since structured output isn't documented
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Ornith-1.5-9B?
Ornith-1.5-9B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against DeepSeek V4.1 Flash's 59 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads on documentation and upkeep.
Other comparisons with DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or Ornith-1.5-9B
- Agents-A1-4B vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- Agents-A1-4B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- BigBang-v1 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- BigBang-v1 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Gemma 4 12B IT
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM-4.5-Air
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM-5.3
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs gpt-oss-120b
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs gpt-oss-20b
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Granite 4.2 3B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Hy3
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Inkling
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Inkling-Small
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Kimi K3
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Kolibri-1
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Laguna M.1
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Laguna S 2.1
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Laguna XS 2.1
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs MiniCPM5-2B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs MiniMax-M2.5
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs MiniMax-M2.7
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs occamy-1.0
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.5-2B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.5-4B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.5-9B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.6-27B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.8-27B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs SmolLM3-3B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- GLM-5.3 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- gpt-oss-20b vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Hy3 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Inkling-Small vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Inkling vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Kimi K3 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Kolibri-1 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Laguna M.1 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- occamy-1.0 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Olmo 3 7B Think vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs SmolLM3-3B
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-vs-ornith-1-5-9b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/deepseek-v4-1-flash.json·/api/v1/tools/ornith-1-5-9b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare deepseek-v4-1-flash ornith-1-5-9b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "deepseek-v4-1-flash", "b": "ornith-1-5-9b"}at/mcp, no key