The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs MiMo-V2-Flash

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.8 to 30.7. MiMo-V2-Flash is 2.2x cheaper per token.

DeepSeek · Xiaomi · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.8 to 30.7, ranking #13 overall.

In the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash wins 2; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, MiMo-V2-Flash is roughly 2.2x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash also accepts a larger context window (1,040,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 51.8 and ranks #13 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 2 exact shared results
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,040,000 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose MiMo-V2-Flash

  • cost matters — it's about 2.2x cheaper per token

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
DeepSeek
MiMo-V2-Flash
Xiaomi
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
51.8
#13
30.7
#117
Reasoning
48.9
#18
30.8
#113
Coding
44.2
#5
17.5
#118
Agents
41.1
#4
8.1
#134
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
2 of 2
0 of 2
Input price
$0.22 / M
$0.10 / M
Output price
$0.66 / M
$0.30 / M
Context window
1,040,000
256,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
MiMo-V2-Flash
Math
35.2#43
29.4#85
Tool use
34.8#2
6.3#147
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

20 reported for DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash · 15 for MiMo-V2-Flash

2 shared

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash outperforms in 2 benchmarks (GPQA, Humanity's Last Exam), while MiMo-V2-Flash is better at 0 benchmarks.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Sun Sep 20 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

MiMo-V2-Flash costs less

For input processing, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash ($0.22/1M tokens) is 2.2x more expensive than MiMo-V2-Flash ($0.10/1M tokens).

For output processing, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash ($0.66/1M tokens) is 2.2x more expensive than MiMo-V2-Flash ($0.30/1M tokens).

In conclusion, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash is more expensive than MiMo-V2-Flash.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Sun Sep 20 2026 • llm-stats.com
DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
Input tokens$0.22
Output tokens$0.66
Best providerFireworks
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Flash
Input tokens$0.10
Output tokens$0.30
Best providerXiaomi
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

454.2B diff

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash has 454.2B more parameters than MiMo-V2-Flash, making it 147.0% larger.

DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
763.2Bparameters
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Flash
309.0Bparameters
763.2B
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
309.0B
MiMo-V2-Flash

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash accepts 1,040,000 input tokens compared to MiMo-V2-Flash's 256,000 tokens. DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash can generate longer responses up to 393,216 tokens, while MiMo-V2-Flash is limited to 16,384 tokens.

DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
Input1,040,000 tokens
Output393,216 tokens
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Flash
Input256,000 tokens
Output16,384 tokens
Sun Sep 20 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas MiMo-V2-Flash does not.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

MiMo-V2-Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Both models are licensed under MIT.

Both models share the same licensing terms, providing consistent usage rights.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash

MIT

Open weights

MiMo-V2-Flash

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash was released on 2026-09-10, while MiMo-V2-Flash was released on 2025-12-16.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash is 9 months newer than MiMo-V2-Flash.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash

Sep 10, 2026

1 weeks ago

8mo newer
MiMo-V2-Flash

Dec 16, 2025

9 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash is available from Fireworks, DeepInfra, DeepSeek, Novita. MiMo-V2-Flash is available from Xiaomi.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash

fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $0.22/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.66/1M
deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.30/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.20/1M
deepseek logo
DeepSeek
Input Price:Input: $0.30/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.20/1M
novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.30/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.20/1M

MiMo-V2-Flash

xiaomi logo
Xiaomi
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.30/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash and MiMo-V2-Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
✓ Preferred
MiMo-V2-Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs MiMo-V2-Flash.

Which is better, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash or MiMo-V2-Flash?

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.8 to 30.7. DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash is made by DeepSeek and MiMo-V2-Flash is made by Xiaomi. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash compare to MiMo-V2-Flash in benchmarks?

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash scores CodeForces: 100.0%, GPQA: 90.9%, Terminal-Bench 2.1: 90.6%, BabyVision: 89.6%, CyberGym: 88.1%. MiMo-V2-Flash scores AIME 2025: 94.1%, Arena-Hard v2: 86.2%, MMLU-Pro: 84.9%, HMMT 2025: 84.4%, GPQA: 83.7%.

Is DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash cheaper than MiMo-V2-Flash?

MiMo-V2-Flash is 2.2x cheaper for input tokens. DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash costs $0.22/M input and $0.66/M output via fireworks. MiMo-V2-Flash costs $0.10/M input and $0.30/M output via xiaomi.

What are the context window sizes for DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash and MiMo-V2-Flash?

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash supports 1.0M tokens and MiMo-V2-Flash supports 256K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash and MiMo-V2-Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (51.8 vs 30.7), context window (1.0M vs 256K), input pricing ($0.22 vs $0.10/M), multimodal support (yes vs no). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash and MiMo-V2-Flash?

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash is developed by DeepSeek and MiMo-V2-Flash is developed by Xiaomi.

Related comparisons