VQV Signal
According to a post on X by @ArtificialAnlys, Artificial Analysis scored Perplexity's Decider v1.3 at 70 and Decider Flash v1.3 at 64 on its Decision Index v2.1. The post says Decider v1.3 ranks #4 on AA-Paperclip with a score of 69 and #3 on EvalSafe-O*NET-AA with a score of 89. It also says Flash gained 4 points over v1.2 and lists costs of $68 and $34 per one million index tasks. The post is titled as an update.
According to a post on X by @ArtificialAnlys, Artificial Analysis scored Perplexity's Decider v1.3 at 70 and Decider Flash v1.3 at 64 on its Decision Index v2.1. The post says Decider v1.3 ranks #4 on AA-Paperclip with a score of 69 and #3 on EvalSafe-O*NET-AA with a score of 89. It also says Flash gained 4 points over v1.2 and lists costs of $68 and $34 per one million index tasks. The post is titled as an update.
AI-assisted summary based on the listed source.
Artificial Analysis gives Decider v1.3 a 70 and Decider Flash v1.3 a 64 on its Decision Index v2.1, ranks Decider v1.3 #4 on AA-Paperclip (69) and #3 on EvalSafe-O*NET-AA (89), and says Flash gained 4 points over v1.2 (about 30 likes, 8,000 views). It puts the cost at $68 and $34 per one million index tasks. Why...
Third-party scores give buyers a way to check Perplexity's own performance claims against an outside benchmark. The cost figures let teams compare Decider and Flash on price per index task. Watch whether these results appear in a fuller published breakdown and whether other evaluators report similar numbers.
VQV organizes public signals from inspectable sources. It does not independently verify the underlying report.
Signal Strength reflects source quality, relevance, freshness and evidence. Public Interest helps organize discovery; it is not proof of truth.
VQV surfaced this signal because it is recent, relevant to Consumer AI, connected to Scobleizer News Pulse (X).
No login, cookies, social SDKs, or automatic posting.
