Skip to main content

Model comparison

DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) vs MiMo-V2-Pro

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 12 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

55.47/100
Margin
12.3pts
winning →
67.78/100
0 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) #81 (Estimated); MiMo-V2-Pro #17 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) and MiMo-V2-Pro share 12 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 26 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Pro (High); 3 to MiMo-V2-Pro.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
12
DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) only
26
MiMo-V2-Pro only
3
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick MiMo-V2-Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 12 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

MiMo-V2-Pro is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 67.78 to 55.47. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

MiMo-V2-Pro's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 78 against 69.8. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 79.4% to 78%.

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 scores and score margins for DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) and MiMo-V2-Pro
CategoryDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)ΔMiMo-V2-Pro
CodingDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)69.8Margin 8.2MiMo-V2-Pro78.0
AgenticDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)70.6MarginNo overlapMiMo-V2-ProNot measured
KnowledgeDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)57.0MarginNo overlapMiMo-V2-ProNot measured
MathDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)94.0MarginNo overlapMiMo-V2-ProNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)B · MiMo-V2-Pro
  1. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 79.4%B 78%
    Winner: DeepSeek V4 Pro (High)Δ 1.4
    SWE-bench Verified: DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) scored 79.4%; MiMo-V2-Pro scored 78%. DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)MiMo-V2-ProComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)$0.435 input / $0.87 outputMiMo-V2-ProNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)Not availableMiMo-V2-ProNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)Not availableMiMo-V2-ProNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)1MMiMo-V2-Pro1MListed context windows are equal.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)MiMo-V2-ProResult
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%95%MiMo-V2-Pro leads
GDPval-AASource 39.9%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1299Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 34.4%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 57.8%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 36.68%Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource 15.3%Not comparable
CodingMiMo-V2-Pro wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)MiMo-V2-ProResult
CodeforcesSource 2919.0Not comparable
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 79.4%78%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%42.5%DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads
AA Coding IndexSource 58.7%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)MiMo-V2-ProResult
MRCR 1MSource 83.3%Not comparable
CorpusQA 1MSource 56.5%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 65.0%60.7%DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads
CritPtSource 10.0%0.3%DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)MiMo-V2-ProResult
MMLU-ProSource 87.1%Not comparable
SimpleQASource 46.2%Not comparable
Chinese-SimpleQASource 77.7%Not comparable
GPQASource 89.1%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 89.1%Not comparable
HLESource 34.5%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 43.1%40.3%DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 90.5%87.0%DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads
AA-HLESource 33.5%28.3%DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -9.7%4.9%MiMo-V2-Pro leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 41.8%26.8%DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 88.6%29.9%MiMo-V2-Pro leads
Math
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)MiMo-V2-ProResult
HMMT Feb 2026Source 94.0%Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource 88.0%Not comparable
ApexSource 27.4%Not comparable
Apex ShortlistSource 85.5%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)MiMo-V2-ProResult
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1264Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Pro (High)MiMo-V2-ProResult
AA-IFBenchSource 71.3%68.8%DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) leads
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) or MiMo-V2-Pro?

MiMo-V2-Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 67.78 to 55.47. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 79.4% and 78%.

Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V4 Pro (High) or MiMo-V2-Pro?

MiMo-V2-Pro has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 78 versus 69.8. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 23, 2026

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.