Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Deepseek
Deepseek
vs
Xiaomi

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus vs MiMo-V2-Flash

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

Get our weekly newsletter on pricing changes, new releases, and tools.

Join the Price Per Token Community

Key Takeaways

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus wins:

  • Better at coding

MiMo-V2-Flash wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Larger context window
  • Faster response time
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at math
Price Advantage
MiMo-V2-Flash
Benchmark Advantage
MiMo-V2-Flash
Context Window
MiMo-V2-Flash
Speed
MiMo-V2-Flash

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusMiMo-V2-Flash
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusMiMo-V2-Flash
LicenseOpen SourceOpen Source
AuthorDeepseekXiaomi
ReleasedSep 2025Dec 2025

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

MiMo-V2-Flash Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Frequently Asked Questions

MiMo-V2-Flash has cheaper input pricing at $0.09/M tokens. MiMo-V2-Flash has cheaper output pricing at $0.29/M tokens.
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 31.9, compared to MiMo-V2-Flash's score of 25.8.
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus has a 163,840 token context window, while MiMo-V2-Flash has a 262,144 token context window.
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus does not support vision. MiMo-V2-Flash does not support vision.