Model comparison
DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) vs MiMo-V2-Flash
Head-to-head evidence from 18 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) #81 (Estimated); MiMo-V2-Flash #91 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) and MiMo-V2-Flash share 18 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 20 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Pro (High); 1 to MiMo-V2-Flash.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 18
- DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) only
- 20
- MiMo-V2-Flash only
- 1
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MiMo-V2-Flash only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 18 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 55.47 versus 54.06. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.43 input / $0.87 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for MiMo-V2-Flash. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for MiMo-V2-Flash.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) | Δ | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)57.0 | Margin→ 27.7 | MiMo-V2-Flash84.7 |
| Coding | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)69.8 | Margin→ 3.6 | MiMo-V2-Flash73.4 |
| Agentic | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)70.6 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2-FlashNot measured |
| Math | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)94.0 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2-FlashNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 79.4%B 73.4%Winner: DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)Δ 6SWE-bench Verified: DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) scored 79.4%; MiMo-V2-Flash scored 73.4%. DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 89.1%B 83.7%Winner: DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)Δ 5.4GPQA: DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) scored 89.1%; MiMo-V2-Flash scored 83.7%. DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMLU-Pro
KnowledgeA 87.1%B 84.9%Winner: DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)Δ 2.2MMLU-Pro: DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) scored 87.1%; MiMo-V2-Flash scored 84.9%. DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) | MiMo-V2-Flash | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)$0.435 input / $0.87 output | MiMo-V2-Flash$0 input / $0 output | MiMo-V2-Flash has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)Not available | MiMo-V2-Flash129 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)Not available | MiMo-V2-Flash2.14 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)1M | MiMo-V2-Flash256K | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 63.3% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 80.4% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | 44.7% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 74.2% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 49% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 94.2% | 83.9% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 39.9% | 16.7% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1299 | 833 | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 34.4% | 12.0% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
CodingMiMo-V2-Flash wins7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| CodeforcesSource | 2919.0 | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 79.4% | 73.4% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 54.4% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 74.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 63.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 46.4% | 25.9% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 58.7% | 49.8% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
KnowledgeMiMo-V2-Flash wins12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 87.1% | 84.9% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
| SimpleQASource | 46.2% | — | Not comparable |
| Chinese-SimpleQASource | 77.7% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | 89.1% | 83.7% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
| GPQA-DSource | 89.1% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 34.5% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 43.1% | 24.7% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 90.5% | 65.6% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
| AA-HLESource | 33.5% | 8.0% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -9.7% | -48.5% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 41.8% | 15.2% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 88.6% | 75.1% | MiMo-V2-Flash leads |
Math5 benchmarks
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1264 | — | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 71.3% | 39.9% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) or MiMo-V2-Flash?
DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 55.47 to 54.06. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 79.4% and 73.4%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) or MiMo-V2-Flash?
MiMo-V2-Flash has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 84.7 versus 57. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) or MiMo-V2-Flash?
MiMo-V2-Flash has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 73.4 versus 69.8. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.