The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs MiniCPM-SALA

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.8 to 14.4.

DeepSeek · OpenBMB · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.8 to 14.4, ranking #13 overall.

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 — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose MiniCPM-SALA

  • you are already invested in the OpenBMB ecosystem

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
DeepSeek
MiniCPM-SALA
OpenBMB
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
51.8
#13
14.4
#236
Reasoning
48.9
#18
15.7
#221
Coding
44.2
#5
21.0
#94
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.22 / M
— / M
Output price
$0.66 / M
— / M
Context window
1,040,000
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
MiniCPM-SALA
Math
35.2#43
14.2#220
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

20 reported for DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash · 24 for MiniCPM-SALA

No common benchmarks found

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash and MiniCPM-SALAdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

753.7B diff

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash has 753.7B more parameters than MiniCPM-SALA, making it 7953.1% larger.

DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
763.2Bparameters
OpenBMB
MiniCPM-SALA
9.5Bparameters
763.2B
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
9.5B
MiniCPM-SALA

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash specifies input context (1,040,000 tokens). Only DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash specifies output context (393,216 tokens).

DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
Input1,040,000 tokens
Output393,216 tokens
OpenBMB
MiniCPM-SALA
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Mon Sep 21 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas MiniCPM-SALA 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

MiniCPM-SALA

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash is licensed under MIT, while MiniCPM-SALA uses Apache 2.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash

MIT

Open weights

MiniCPM-SALA

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash was released on 2026-09-10, while MiniCPM-SALA was released on 2026-02-11.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash is 7 months newer than MiniCPM-SALA.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash

Sep 10, 2026

1 weeks ago

7mo newer
MiniCPM-SALA

Feb 11, 2026

7 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

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

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

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
✓ Preferred
MiniCPM-SALA
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs MiniCPM-SALA.

Which is better, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash or MiniCPM-SALA?

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.8 to 14.4. DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash is made by DeepSeek and MiniCPM-SALA is made by OpenBMB. 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 MiniCPM-SALA 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%. MiniCPM-SALA scores HumanEval: 95.1%, RULER 64k: 92.7%, RULER 128k: 89.4%, MBPP: 89.1%, RULER 512K: 87.1%.

What are the context window sizes for DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash and MiniCPM-SALA?

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash supports 1.0M tokens and MiniCPM-SALA supports an unknown number of 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 MiniCPM-SALA?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (51.8 vs 14.4), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (MIT vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash and MiniCPM-SALA?

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash is developed by DeepSeek and MiniCPM-SALA is developed by OpenBMB.

Related comparisons