DeepInfer Field Notes Independent / fan-made
Sources / 2026.10

DeepInfer Sources: Official Docs and V4.1-Flash References

Every factual claim in this dossier about DeepInfer, DeepSeek's V4.1-Flash inference framework, is tied to a public source. This page is the public register: what we read, when we read it, and how confident we are in each layer.

Source register/11 min read/Accessed 2026-10-20

Every factual claim in this dossier about DeepInfer, DeepSeek's V4.1-Flash inference framework, is tied to a public source. We separate four layers: A official primary sources, B official claims that cannot be independently verified, C named secondary coverage, and D community observations that change by the hour. A number is only as strong as its layer.

A. Official primary sources

B. Official claims we could not independently verify

These are DeepSeek's own production numbers. We quote them with “DeepSeek says” and do not treat them as benchmark results.

  • 155 trillion tokens/day per cluster; US$38 revenue per GPU-hour at valley pricing. From the official Q&A and Zhihu post. The cluster size, GPU mix, and measurement window are not disclosed. Revenue is not profit.
  • Load balancing reaches roughly 80% of a perfectly balanced offline benchmark. From the official Q&A.
  • DSpark variable-length verification: +4–7% at the production point, up to +11% at 96 concurrent sequences per rank. From the Q&A table.
  • Open-source FlashMLA is 5–10% slower on the decode kernel, at most 5% end-to-end. DeepSeek's comparison with its internal version.
  • 3FS KV cache: ~100 PiB, 3-day agent TTL, 7-day chatbot TTL, ~14.4 TB logical KV per GPU, ~400 Gbps per 8 GPUs. Production design, not included in the release.

C. Secondary coverage

D. Community observations

Comparison sources

Name-disambiguation sources

What we could not read

The Chinese Zhihu post contains a “线上系统实际统计” image. Our environment could not load the image host (SSL error), and the text mirror only returned the article text. The 96% cache hit, ~400 ms TTFT, and 230 tok/s figures attributed to that dashboard therefore remain secondary. We do not put them in headlines, spec strips, or benchmark tables.

We also did not have access to SM100 or Ascend 950 hardware, so we did not run the code, reproduce the charts, or measure Ascend performance. Every performance statement on this site is a source reading, not a hands-on result.

How to cite this site

If you cite a factual claim, cite the primary source linked on the page rather than this dossier. If you cite our analysis or the name-disambiguation table, link to the specific page and include the access date:

DeepInfer Field Notes, “Which DeepInfer? A name collision, resolved,” accessed 20 October 2026, https://deepinfer.net/name/.
Corrections

If a source changes or a claim is wrong, the page and this register should change together. The snapshot date at the top of each page is the boundary of what we checked.

Back to About, or read the limits.

↑