Hy4 preview vs MiMo-V2-Flash

Updated October 13, 2026. Rank says Hy4 preview is ahead. Price, access, and your workload can each overturn that. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.

Decision reading

Hy4 preview has the higher public point estimate, 60.86 versus 40.86. Their conditional score ranges overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence. 2 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Model A

Hy4 preview

Tencent

60.86/100

Estimated · Public rank #48

Conditional range 46.5–75.2

Model B

MiMo-V2-Flash

Xiaomi

40.86/100

Estimated · Public rank #128

Conditional range 31.1–50.6

Shared results: 2
Hy4 preview only: 28
MiMo-V2-Flash only: 6
Like-for-like categories: 0 / 8

Estimated: Hy4 preview and MiMo-V2-Flash. Conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.How the comparison works

Which one for your work

Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.

Long documents
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
Hy4 preview
Hy4 preview has the larger documented context window.
Confidence: documented

Show secondary and unsupported calls

Coding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Not enough matched evidence
MiMo-V2-Flash is scored on Estimated evidence for coding, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.
Confidence: limited
Agentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
MiMo-V2-Flash is not ranked on the public lane for agentic, so no winner is named for agentic.
Confidence: limited
Chat turn cost
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates
Cache-heavy agent loop cost
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates
Repository review cost
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates

Which one for a specific job

Choose a job from the LLM Selector's task catalog to see the category row it rests on, under the same basis rules as the table below. A directional row stays directional; choosing a job never creates a winner.

Pick the job you would use them for

The same task catalog as the LLM Selector. Each job names the evidence surface it rests on; nothing here adds a new score.

57.1Hy4 preview29.0MiMo-V2-Flash

Directional only · BenchAlign v5.8

Hy4 preview has the higher coding point estimate. Conditional score ranges do not establish rank confidence.

Coding scores combine specific tasks and setups. Match the editor, harness, and effort to your workflow.

Open the coding leaderboard Shortlist models for this job

Same basis rules as the category table below

Shape of the matched evidence

Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.

Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.

SWE MultilingualCoding
Normalized gap 11.2
Hy4 preview:82.9%
MiMo-V2-Flash:71.7%
Hy4 preview source MiMo-V2-Flash source
GPQAKnowledge
Normalized gap 8.6
Hy4 preview:92.3%
MiMo-V2-Flash:83.7%
Hy4 preview source MiMo-V2-Flash source

Bars run 0–100 on each benchmark’s normalized display scale

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign v5.8 lane for agentic, coding, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.

Coding

Directional only

Hy4 preview: 57.1; Supported · #26/148
MiMo-V2-Flash: 29.0; Estimated · #97/148
Basis: BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 8 vs 3 public rows
Reading: Directional only

Knowledge

Directional only

Hy4 preview: 63.6; Estimated · #39/180
MiMo-V2-Flash: 34.7; Supported · #131/180
Basis: BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 4 vs 3 public rows
Reading: Directional only

Agentic

Not comparable

Hy4 preview: 54.5; Estimated · #37/123
MiMo-V2-Flash: Not ranked
Basis: BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 15 vs 0 public rows
Reading: Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable

Hy4 preview: Not ranked
MiMo-V2-Flash: 58.1; Unranked · 3 rankable rows
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable

Hy4 preview: 88.3; Unranked · 1 rankable row
MiMo-V2-Flash: Not ranked
Basis: Provisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable

Hy4 preview: Not ranked
MiMo-V2-Flash: Not ranked
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable

Hy4 preview: Not ranked
MiMo-V2-Flash: 46.3; #90/127
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Math

Not comparable

Hy4 preview: Not ranked
MiMo-V2-Flash: Not ranked
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Category scores with the server-provided evidence basis for Hy4 preview and MiMo-V2-Flash
Category	Hy4 preview	MiMo-V2-Flash	Basis	Reading
Coding	57.1Supported · #26/148	29.0Estimated · #97/148	Directional onlyBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 8 vs 3 public rows	Directional only
Knowledge	63.6Estimated · #39/180	34.7Supported · #131/180	Directional onlyBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 4 vs 3 public rows	Directional only
Agentic	54.5Estimated · #37/123	Not ranked	Not comparableBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 15 vs 0 public rows	Not comparable
Reasoning	Not ranked	58.1Unranked · 3 rankable rows	Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows	Not comparable
Multimodal	88.3Unranked · 1 rankable row	Not ranked	Not comparableProvisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows	Not comparable
Multilingual	Not ranked	Not ranked	Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows	Not comparable
Instruction following	Not ranked	46.3#90/127	Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows	Not comparable
Math	Not ranked	Not ranked	Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows	Not comparable

Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign v5.8) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the provisional lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.

Supported evidence per lane · bars run 0–100Methodology

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.

Chat turn

1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

Hy4 preview: Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies; Fits in one request
MiMo-V2-Flash: Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies; Fits in one request

Hy4 preview has no comparable published API token rate. MiMo-V2-Flash has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

Hy4 preview: Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies; Fits in one request
MiMo-V2-Flash: Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies; Fits in one request

Hy4 preview has no comparable published API token rate. MiMo-V2-Flash has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

Hy4 preview: Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies; Fits in one request; Cached-input rate unavailable
MiMo-V2-Flash: Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies; Fits in one request; Cached-input rate unavailable

Hy4 preview has no comparable published API token rate. MiMo-V2-Flash has no comparable published API token rate.

Cached input falls back to the list input rate only where a cached rate is unpublished

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

SpecificationHy4 previewMiMo-V2-Flash

Context window

Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.

Hy4 preview

Tencent Hy4 preview model card

MiMo-V2-Flash

256K

API model ID

Hy4 preview

tencent/Hy4-preview

Tencent Hy4 preview model card

MiMo-V2-Flash

Not sourced

Cached-input rate

A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.

Hy4 preview

No comparable hosted API rate

Tencent Hy4 preview model card

MiMo-V2-Flash

No comparable hosted API rate

Documented inputs

Hy4 preview

Not sourced

MiMo-V2-Flash

Not sourced

Documented outputs

Hy4 preview

Not sourced

MiMo-V2-Flash

Not sourced

Provider availability

Hy4 preview

Not sourced

MiMo-V2-Flash

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

Hy4 preview

Reasoning

MiMo-V2-Flash

Reasoning

Weight access

Hy4 preview

Open Weight

MiMo-V2-Flash

Open Weight

License

Hy4 preview

Open Weight

MiMo-V2-Flash

Open Weight

Release date

Hy4 preview

2026-08-28

MiMo-V2-Flash

2026-03-15

If you already use one of these models

Deployment change: The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
Quality signal: Hy4 preview has the higher public point estimate, 60.86 versus 40.86. Their conditional score ranges overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence.
Workload cost: A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff: Hy4 preview has the larger documented window (1M).

Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Questions

Which is better, Hy4 preview or MiMo-V2-Flash?

Hy4 preview has the higher public point estimate, 60.86 versus 40.86. Their conditional score ranges overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.

Which is better for coding, Hy4 preview or MiMo-V2-Flash?

Hy4 preview scores higher for coding on the public lane, 57.1 to 29. MiMo-V2-Flash is scored on Estimated evidence for coding, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for coding from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Hy4 preview or MiMo-V2-Flash?

MiMo-V2-Flash is not ranked on the public lane for agentic tasks, so no winner is named for agentic tasks.

Which costs less, Hy4 preview or MiMo-V2-Flash?

Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.

Which has the larger context window, Hy4 preview or MiMo-V2-Flash?

Hy4 preview has the larger documented context window: 1M, compared with 256K.

Benchmark evidence

The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.

Browse raw public benchmark evidence36 rows

Agentic

Terminal-Bench 2.1
Hy4 preview85.4%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
CyberGym
Hy4 preview78.4%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
WideResearch
Hy4 preview83.9%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
DRACO
Hy4 preview77.2%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
MCP Atlas
Hy4 preview83.7%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
Toolathlon-Verified
Hy4 preview74.1%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
APEX-Agents
Hy4 preview37.1%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
skillsBench
Hy4 preview62.9%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
JobBench
Hy4 preview61.7%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
Agents' Last Exam
Hy4 preview22.8%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
AutomationBench
Hy4 preview32.1%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
BankerToolBench
Hy4 preview78.6%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
HLE w/ tools
Hy4 preview55.4%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)
Hy4 preview55.1%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
CWE-bench v1
Hy4 preview53.0%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable

Coding

Terminal-Bench 2.1
Hy4 preview85.4%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
SWE-bench Pro
Hy4 preview65.7%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
SWE Multilingual
Hy4 preview82.9%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash71.7%
Source
Hy4 preview leads this result
DeepSWE
Hy4 preview64.3%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
NL2Repo
Hy4 preview58.9%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
ProgramBench
Hy4 preview17.5%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
PostTrain Bench
Hy4 preview35.6%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
sweMarathon
Hy4 preview31.9%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
SWE-bench Verified
Hy4 preview—
MiMo-V2-Flash73.4%
Source
Not directly comparable
LiveCodeBench v6
Hy4 preview—
MiMo-V2-Flash80.6%
Source
Not directly comparable

Reasoning

CritPt
Hy4 preview16.9%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
LongBench v2
Hy4 preview—
MiMo-V2-Flash60.6%
Source
Not directly comparable

Multimodal

OfficeQA Pro
Hy4 preview66.2%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable

Knowledge

GPQA
Hy4 preview92.3%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash83.7%
Source
Hy4 preview leads this result
GPQA-D
Hy4 preview92.3%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
HLE
Hy4 preview55.4%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
HLE w/o tools
Hy4 preview43.4%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
MMLU-Pro
Hy4 preview—
MiMo-V2-Flash84.9%
Source
Not directly comparable
GPQA Diamond (Vals)
Hy4 preview—
MiMo-V2-Flash59.3%
Source
Not directly comparable

Math

Apex
Hy4 preview74.2%
Source
MiMo-V2-Flash—
Not directly comparable
AIME 2025
Hy4 preview—
MiMo-V2-Flash94.1%
Source
Not directly comparable

36 public results · 2 shared

Related comparisons

Compare API pricing Read the methodology Open the model selector

Watch Hy4 preview vs MiMo-V2-Flash

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 5,500+ readers.

Last updated October 13, 2026

Hy4 preview vs MiMo-V2-Flash

Decision reading

Which one for your work

Long documents

Coding work

Agentic work

Chat turn cost

Cache-heavy agent loop cost

Repository review cost

Which one for a specific job

What is actually comparable

Shape of the matched evidence

Category results, on a stated basis

Coding

Knowledge

Agentic

Reasoning

Multimodal

Multilingual

Instruction following

Math

What each workload costs

Chat turn

Repository review

Cache-heavy agent loop

Specification differences

Context window

API model ID

Cached-input rate

Documented inputs

Documented outputs

Provider availability

Reasoning profile

Weight access

License

Release date

If you already use one of these models

Questions

Which is better, Hy4 preview or MiMo-V2-Flash?

Which is better for coding, Hy4 preview or MiMo-V2-Flash?

Which is better for agentic tasks, Hy4 preview or MiMo-V2-Flash?

Which costs less, Hy4 preview or MiMo-V2-Flash?

Which has the larger context window, Hy4 preview or MiMo-V2-Flash?

Benchmark evidence

Agentic

Coding

Reasoning

Multimodal

Knowledge

Math

Related comparisons

Watch Hy4 preview vs MiMo-V2-Flash