The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

MAI-Code-1-Flash vs Parse

Comparing MAI-Code-1-Flash and Parse across benchmarks, pricing, and capabilities.

Microsoft · Cohere · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

MAI-Code-1-Flash and Parse trade strengths across price, capabilities, and technical limits. The better choice depends on the workload.

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

Choose MAI-Code-1-Flash

  • you are already invested in the Microsoft ecosystem

Choose Parse

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

MAI-Code-1-Flash
Microsoft
Parse
Cohere
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
— / M
— / M
Output price
— / M
— / M
Context window
—
8,192

Individual benchmarks

15 reported for MAI-Code-1-Flash · 1 for Parse

No common benchmarks found

MAI-Code-1-Flash and Parsedon'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

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Parse specifies input context (8,192 tokens).

Microsoft
MAI-Code-1-Flash
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Cohere
Parse
Input8,192 tokens
Output- tokens
Fri Sep 04 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Parse supports multimodal inputs, whereas MAI-Code-1-Flash does not.

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

MAI-Code-1-Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Parse

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Both models are licensed under proprietary licenses.

Both models have usage restrictions defined by their respective organizations.

MAI-Code-1-Flash

Proprietary

Closed source

Parse

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

MAI-Code-1-Flash was released on 2026-06-02, while Parse was released on 2026-08-27.

Parse is 3 months newer than MAI-Code-1-Flash.

MAI-Code-1-Flash

Jun 2, 2026

3 months ago

Parse

Aug 27, 2026

1 weeks ago

2mo 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→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against MAI-Code-1-Flash and Parse side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

MAI-Code-1-Flash
✓ Preferred
Parse
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about MAI-Code-1-Flash vs Parse.

Which is better, MAI-Code-1-Flash or Parse?

MAI-Code-1-Flash (Microsoft) and Parse (Cohere) each have strengths in different areas. Compare their benchmark scores, pricing, context windows, and capabilities above to determine which fits your needs.

How does MAI-Code-1-Flash compare to Parse in benchmarks?

MAI-Code-1-Flash scores AIME 2026: 92.5%, GPQA: 84.6%, IFBench: 75.0%, Tau2 Telecom: 71.7%, SWE-Bench Verified: 71.6%. Parse scores ParseBench: 79.2%.

What are the context window sizes for MAI-Code-1-Flash and Parse?

MAI-Code-1-Flash supports an unknown number of tokens and Parse supports 8K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between MAI-Code-1-Flash and Parse?

Key differences include multimodal support (no vs yes). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes MAI-Code-1-Flash and Parse?

MAI-Code-1-Flash is developed by Microsoft and Parse is developed by Cohere.

Related comparisons