DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro: Specs & Benchmark Comparison

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash is developed by DeepSeek, while MiMo-V2.6-Pro comes from Xiaomi. Both were released in September 2026. MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the larger model at roughly 1.0 trillion parameters, against 552 billion for DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash.

The two models share 8 published benchmarks. MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads on 5 of them, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash on 3. The widest gaps are on Program Bench, where MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 26.5% against 20.3%; CyberGym, where MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 94.0% against 88.1%. Averaged across everything we track, DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash sits at 60.2% and MiMo-V2.6-Pro at 59.7%.

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash is the cheaper API at $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens, about 45% below MiMo-V2.6-Pro at $0.43 and $0.87. Both accept a context window of about 1M tokens. DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash accepts text and images as input, while MiMo-V2.6-Pro accepts text, images, audio, and video.

CharacteristicDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashMiMo-V2.6-Pro
CompanyDeepSeekXiaomi
Release DateSeptember 10, 2026September 22, 2026
Parameters552B1.0T
MultimodalYesYes
Context (input)1.0M1.0M
Context (output)393K—
Input Price / 1M$0.30$0.43
Output Price / 1M$1.20$0.87
Average Score60.2%59.7%
Benchmarks
Program Bench20.3%26.5%
CyberGym88.1%94.0%
Terminal-Bench 4.031.2%34.9%
SEC-bench Pro62.8%66.3%
ExploitGym15.3%17.8%
DeepSWE 1.174.2%71.9%
Terminal-Bench 2.190.6%89.9%
Agents' Last Exam31.8%31.6%

Visual Benchmark Comparison

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash
MiMo-V2.6-Pro
Program Bench0.2 vs 0.3
0.2
0.3
CyberGym0.9 vs 0.9
0.9
0.9
Terminal-Bench 4.00.3 vs 0.3
0.3
0.3
SEC-bench Pro0.6 vs 0.7
0.6
0.7
ExploitGym0.2 vs 0.2
0.2
0.2
DeepSWE 1.10.7 vs 0.7
0.7
0.7
Terminal-Bench 2.10.9 vs 0.9
0.9
0.9
Agents' Last Exam0.3 vs 0.3
0.3
0.3

Verdict

MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads in 1 out of 4 comparison categories.

Overall Performance

Both models show comparable average scores: DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash — 0.6, MiMo-V2.6-Pro — 0.6.

API Cost

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is 1.1x cheaper: input $0.43/1M vs $0.30/1M tokens.

Context Window

Same context size: 1M tokens.

Recency

Both models were released around the same time: 9/10/2026 and 9/22/2026.

More About These Models

Related Comparisons

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better for coding — DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash or MiMo-V2.6-Pro?
Direct comparison on the SWE-Bench benchmark is not available. We recommend reviewing other metrics on the comparison page.
Which model is cheaper — DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash or MiMo-V2.6-Pro?
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash is cheaper for input: $0.30 per 1M tokens vs $0.43.
Which has a larger context window — DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash or MiMo-V2.6-Pro?
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash supports a larger context: 1,048,576 tokens vs 1,048,576.

The DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash and MiMo-V2.6-Pro comparison is updated for 2026. Data includes benchmark results, API pricing, context window size and other specifications. For more detailed information, visit the DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash or MiMo-V2.6-Pro page. See also the complete list of AI model comparisons.