Model Comparison

DeepSeek VL2 Tiny vs LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601

Comparing DeepSeek VL2 Tiny and LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 across benchmarks, pricing, and capabilities.

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

No common benchmarks found

DeepSeek VL2 Tiny and LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 don't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Cost data unavailable.

Lowest available price from all providers
Thu Apr 16 2026 • llm-stats.com
DeepSeek
DeepSeek VL2 Tiny
Input tokens$0.00
Output tokens$0.00
Best providerUnknown Organization
Meituan
LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601
Input tokens$0.30
Output tokens$1.20
Best providerMeituan
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

557.0B diff

LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 has 557.0B more parameters than DeepSeek VL2 Tiny, making it 18566.7% larger.

DeepSeek
DeepSeek VL2 Tiny
3.0Bparameters
Meituan
LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601
560.0Bparameters
3.0B
DeepSeek VL2 Tiny
560.0B
LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 specifies input context (128,000 tokens). Only LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

DeepSeek
DeepSeek VL2 Tiny
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Meituan
LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Thu Apr 16 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

DeepSeek VL2 Tiny supports multimodal inputs, whereas LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 does not.

DeepSeek VL2 Tiny can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

DeepSeek VL2 Tiny

Text
Images
Audio
Video

LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

DeepSeek VL2 Tiny is licensed under deepseek, while LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 uses MIT.

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

DeepSeek VL2 Tiny

deepseek

Open weights

LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

DeepSeek VL2 Tiny was released on 2024-12-13, while LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 was released on 2026-01-14.

LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 is 13 months newer than DeepSeek VL2 Tiny.

DeepSeek VL2 Tiny

Dec 13, 2024

1.3 years ago

LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601

Jan 14, 2026

3 months ago

1.1yr newer

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

Key Takeaways

Supports multimodal inputs
Larger context window (128,000 tokens)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
DeepSeek
DeepSeek VL2 Tiny
Meituan
LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601

FAQ

Common questions about DeepSeek VL2 Tiny vs LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601

DeepSeek VL2 Tiny (DeepSeek) and LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 (Meituan) each have strengths in different areas. Compare their benchmark scores, pricing, context windows, and capabilities above to determine which fits your needs.
DeepSeek VL2 Tiny scores DocVQA: 88.9%, ChartQA: 81.0%, OCRBench: 80.9%, TextVQA: 80.7%, AI2D: 71.6%. LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 scores AIME 2025: 99.6%, Tau2 Telecom: 99.3%, Tau2 Retail: 88.6%, LiveCodeBench: 82.8%, GPQA: 80.5%.
DeepSeek VL2 Tiny supports an unknown number of tokens and LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 supports 128K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (deepseek vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
DeepSeek VL2 Tiny is developed by DeepSeek and LongCat-Flash-Thinking-2601 is developed by Meituan.