Model comparison
DeepSeek V4 Pro vs MiMo-V2-Flash
Head-to-head evidence from 3 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Pro #46 (Supported); MiMo-V2-Flash #91 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Pro and MiMo-V2-Flash share 3 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 20 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Pro; 16 to MiMo-V2-Flash.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 3
- DeepSeek V4 Pro only
- 20
- MiMo-V2-Flash only
- 16
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick DeepSeek V4 Pro 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 3 shared benchmark results across 2 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 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 60.66 to 54.06. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
DeepSeek V4 Pro 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. MiMo-V2-Flash is the reasoning model in the pair, while DeepSeek V4 Pro is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. DeepSeek V4 Pro 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 | Δ | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | DeepSeek V4 Pro41.3 | Margin→ 43.4 | MiMo-V2-Flash84.7 |
| Coding | DeepSeek V4 Pro65.3 | Margin→ 8.1 | MiMo-V2-Flash73.4 |
| Agentic | DeepSeek V4 Pro59.1 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2-FlashNot measured |
| Math | DeepSeek V4 Pro31.7 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2-FlashNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 72.9%B 83.7%Winner: MiMo-V2-FlashΔ 10.8GPQA: DeepSeek V4 Pro scored 72.9%; MiMo-V2-Flash scored 83.7%. MiMo-V2-Flash wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMLU-Pro
KnowledgeA 82.9%B 84.9%Winner: MiMo-V2-FlashΔ 2MMLU-Pro: DeepSeek V4 Pro scored 82.9%; MiMo-V2-Flash scored 84.9%. MiMo-V2-Flash wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 73.6%B 73.4%Winner: DeepSeek V4 ProΔ 0.2SWE-bench Verified: DeepSeek V4 Pro scored 73.6%; MiMo-V2-Flash scored 73.4%. DeepSeek V4 Pro wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Pro | MiMo-V2-Flash | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek V4 Pro$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 ProNot available | MiMo-V2-Flash129 tok/s | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek V4 ProNot available | MiMo-V2-Flash2.14 s | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek V4 Pro1M | MiMo-V2-Flash256K | DeepSeek V4 Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 59.1% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 69.4% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 46.3% | — | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | 59.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | 50.28% | — | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | 17.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 12.0% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 83.9% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 16.7% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 833 | Not comparable |
CodingMiMo-V2-Flash wins6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 73.6% | 73.4% | DeepSeek V4 Pro leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 52.1% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 69.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 59.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 49.8% | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | — | 25.9% | Not comparable |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
KnowledgeMiMo-V2-Flash wins12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 82.9% | 84.9% | MiMo-V2-Flash leads |
| SimpleQASource | 45% | — | Not comparable |
| Chinese-SimpleQASource | 75.8% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | 72.9% | 83.7% | MiMo-V2-Flash leads |
| GPQA-DSource | 72.9% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 7.7% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 24.7% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 65.6% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 8.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | -48.5% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 15.2% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 75.1% | Not comparable |
Math5 benchmarks
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1264 | — | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 39.9% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Pro or MiMo-V2-Flash?
DeepSeek V4 Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 60.66 to 54.06. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 72.9% and 83.7%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, DeepSeek V4 Pro or MiMo-V2-Flash?
MiMo-V2-Flash has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 84.7 versus 41.3. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V4 Pro or MiMo-V2-Flash?
MiMo-V2-Flash has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 73.4 versus 65.3. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified 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.