Full Bench Comparision of On Prem Deepseek 4 Flash 0731 vs Deepseek.com

I’ve download the original Deepseek 4 Flash 0731 from Hugging Face, but a faceoff against the cloud version consistently show the Hugging Face version performing worst than the cloud version in various test benches. Is deepseek giving us the real deal ?

Good local quant outperforms cloud version every single time. Make sure your inference is configured properly, check the numerous threads here

Not sure where you got the idea. Go do a full bench, not just a tools calls, not off some 3rd party sites (e.g. ollama) that offers the “same model” , feelings don’t count .

Sure. Whatever floats your boat. Peace.

There you go:

HumanEval Benchmark — DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731

Local vLLM vs OpenRouter

Benchmark: HumanEval (openai/openai_humaneval), 164 problems, pass@1 (official verify scorer)
Harness: Inspect (inspect-ai 0.3.253, inspect-evals 0.16.0)

Endpoint Version / Serving Sampling Pass@1
Local vLLM 192.168.1.151:8888 vLLM 0.1.dev19023+g30038602b.d20260805 (eugr/spark-vllm-b12x image, 2×DGX Spark TP2, 200 Gb/s CX-7) temp 1.0, top_p 0.95, reasoning=max 158/164 = 96.3%
OpenRouter deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 hosted temp 1.0, top_p 0.95, reasoning=max 156/164 = 95.1%
OpenRouter (sensitivity) hosted temp 0.8 149/164 = 90.9%

Model: deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 @ rev 7872f01b1d1fe23eabc4c98b48bffcef5a386062

Local vLLM serving params: max_model_len auto → observed 1,048,576;
max_num_batched_tokens=4096; max_num_seqs=6; long_prefill_token_threshold=1024;
prefix-cache retention 4096; partial-prefill 1/1/0; DSpark k5.

Run params (both): temp 1.0, top_p 0.95, reasoning=max, max_tokens=32768, client_timeout=7200; local concurrency=1,
OpenRouter concurrency=10. 0 errors / 0 timeouts on all legs.