DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Kimi K3.1 Pro: $38 vs $8.34 revenue per GPU-hour
An economics comparison putting V4.1 Flash at $38 revenue per GB200 GPU-hour versus Kimi K3.1 Pro at $8.34 per MI355X GPU-hour, arguing its Engram, causal encoder-decoder and KV reuse architecture will be widely adopted.
The choice can not be clearer than this: 1) Kimi 3.1 Pro's 8.34$ income per AMD MI355X GPU / hr vs 2) DS V4.1 Flash' 38$ income per GB200 GPU / hr There is no match on economics between Moonshot and DeepSeek (although they are different model tiers). Off course, you can split hair and say it was on NVL72 for DS numbers. So what. Most GPUs are shipping in rack configurations / large scale up now. Nobody can avoid the pull of DS V4.1 Flash architecture: - Engram - Causal Encoder-Decoder (or Self Decoder) - KV Re-use In USA (SpaceX, Muse) and in China (Xiaomi, GLM, Kimi) all will have to adopt DS V4.1 Flash architecture. It is too good not to. Caveat: On Helios type rack/NVL72 Kimi K3.1's income per GPU will improve, though will be far less than that of DS v4.1 Flash.
This post quotes another post: x.com/semianalysis_/status/2114496296455184834