Noometry

Model comparison

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 44.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash DeepSeek

50.3

Rank #40 Confirmed

MiMo-V2.6-Flash Xiaomi

44.4

Rank #74 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher in 7 categories and MiMo-V2.6-Flash in 1 category; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads 46.2 to 29.6.
  • MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $0.15 / $0.60 for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash.
  • MiMo-V2.6-Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

Side by side

DeepSeek V4.1 FlashMiMo-V2.6-Flash
ProviderDeepSeekXiaomi
Noometry Index50.344.4
Released2026-09-092026-09-22
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1M1.05M
Max output393K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.15$0.14
Output $ / M tokens$0.60$0.28
Results tracked2513

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 52.8 (#29), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 44.3 (#68)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Coding15111516
LMArena WebDev1620—
SciCode51.9%—
ALE-Bench1,092—

Reasoning DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 46.2 (#39), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 29.6 (#82)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Hard Prompts14851481
NYT Connections (extended)89.6%—
CritPt14.3%—
DTBench89.9%—
LMCA47%—
Surface Evolver Bench46.3%—
Epoch Capabilities Index155.01—

Math DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 48.4 (#52), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 37.4 (#97)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Math14931477
ProofBench54%—

Knowledge Too close to call

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 41.6 (#97), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 42.0 (#91)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Expert15051516

Multimodal Not comparable

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: —, MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 40.2 (#39)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Vision—1266

Multilingual Too close to call

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 55.5 (#29), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 54.6 (#41)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Non-English14521439
LMArena Chinese15061501
LMArena Russian14731424
LMArena French1448—
LMArena Spanish1499—

Instruction Following Too close to call

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 77.6 (#24), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 77.0 (#33)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following14751463

Long Context Too close to call

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 45.2 (#46), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 44.8 (#52)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Longer Query14761465

Writing & Preference DeepSeek V4.1 Flash leads

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash: 65.8 (#43), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 63.9 (#61)

BenchmarkDeepSeek V4.1 FlashMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text14651459
LMArena Creative Writing14361408
LMArena Multi-Turn14601460
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1540—

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash better than MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 44.4 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; DeepSeek V4.1 Flash lists at $0.15 and $0.60.

Is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash or MiMo-V2.6-Flash better for coding?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.8 versus 44.3 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and MiMo-V2.6-Flash share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash has 25 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Flash has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper