OverpayingForAIPricing desk

SQL · 4 checks · max 500 tokens · benched 2026-09-16

DeepSeek V4 Pro vs DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash on products over 100 units with having

DeepSeek models side by side on "Products over 100 units with HAVING": DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 scores 10/10; DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 is the cheapest answer scoring 8+ at $0.04 per 1,000 runs. Outputs, checks, judge reasons, latency and cost.

The prompt every model received

System

You are a database engineer. Reply with a single SQL statement and nothing else.

User

Tables: products(id, name) and order_items(product_id, quantity). Write one standard SQL query that lists product names whose total quantity sold across all order_items is greater than 100. Filter the aggregate with a HAVING clause.

Rubric for the judge: Join, SUM(quantity), GROUP BY product, HAVING > 100; returns names only; no WHERE on the aggregate.

Side by side

Every cell is one OpenRouter call at temperature 0 with the prompt's token cap and reasoning effort "low" where the model supports it. Cost is usage × the catalogue rate in models.json. Quality is one judge call to anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5 against the prompt's rubric, cached per prompt version.

DeepSeek V4 Pro

deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro

10/10
Latency
499ms
Cost
$0.00062
Per 1,000
$0.62

147 in · 318 out (272 reasoning) · 20 words · checks 4/4

  • regex
  • regex
  • regex
  • regex
SELECT p.name
FROM products p
JOIN order_items oi ON p.id = oi.product_id
GROUP BY p.id, p.name
HAVING SUM(oi.quantity) > 100;

Judge: Query correctly joins tables, groups by product, uses HAVING with SUM(quantity) > 100 filter, returns names only, and contains no WHERE clause on the aggregate.

DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423

deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash

10/10
top judge scorecheapest scoring 8+
Latency
507ms
Cost
$3.8e-5
Per 1,000
$0.04

149 in · 208 out (176 reasoning) · 20 words · checks 4/4

  • regex
  • regex
  • regex
  • regex
SELECT p.name
FROM products p
JOIN order_items oi ON p.id = oi.product_id
GROUP BY p.id, p.name
HAVING SUM(oi.quantity) > 100;

Judge: Query correctly joins tables, groups by product, uses HAVING with SUM(quantity) > 100 filter, returns names only, and contains no WHERE clause on the aggregate.

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash

deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash

10/10
Latency
991ms
Cost
$4.8e-5
Per 1,000
$0.05

94 in · 57 out (15 reasoning) · 19 words · checks 4/4

  • regex
  • regex
  • regex
  • regex
SELECT p.name
FROM products p
JOIN order_items oi ON oi.product_id = p.id
GROUP BY p.name
HAVING SUM(oi.quantity) > 100;

Judge: Query correctly joins tables, groups by product name, uses SUM(quantity) in HAVING clause to filter aggregates > 100, returns only names, and contains no WHERE clause on the aggregate.

Frequently asked

What does this prompt test?

SQL: Join, SUM(quantity), GROUP BY product, HAVING > 100; returns names only; no WHERE on the aggregate. The deterministic checks are regex, regex, regex, regex.

Which model should I pick for this task?

If the judge's bar of 8/10 is good enough for you, DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 at $0.04 per 1,000 runs. If you need the top score, DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 at $0.04 per 1,000 runs.

If our calculators helped you cut down on hidden AI wallet leaks, thanks for using them. A tiny fraction of your savings is what keeps our pricing indexes updated daily.

Not sure which AI is cheapest for your use case? Find out in 30 seconds — no signup required.

AI cost intelligence

Stop overpaying for AI tools

Join the OverpayingForAI list for pricing updates, cheaper alternatives, and practical buying guidance.

Now tracking 50+ AI tools, models, platforms, subscriptions, coding tools, and automation products.

We use your email only for OverpayingForAI updates. Unsubscribe anytime.