Model comparison

DeepSeek LLM 67B vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek LLM 67B DeepSeek

24.9

Rank #347 Confirmed

MiMo-V2.6-Flash Xiaomi

48.5

Rank #55 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek LLM 67B scores higher in 0 categories and MiMo-V2.6-Flash in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads 51.9 to 8.7.

Side by side

DeepSeek LLM 67B and MiMo-V2.6-Flash specifications
DeepSeek LLM 67BMiMo-V2.6-Flash
ProviderDeepSeekXiaomi
Noometry Index24.948.5
Released2023-11-292026-09-21
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—1.05M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.14
Output $ / M tokens—$0.28
Results tracked1519

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads

DeepSeek LLM 67B: 31.9 (#278), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 53.4 (#30)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Coding10961504
LMArena WebDev—1637
SciCode—51.3%

Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads

DeepSeek LLM 67B: 16.5 (#304), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 36.5 (#66)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Hard Prompts10701482
CritPt—12%
Chess Puzzles0%—
Epoch Capabilities Index110.5—

Math MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads

DeepSeek LLM 67B: 8.7 (#324), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 51.9 (#52)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Math11081468
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20250.8%—
ProofBench—63%
MATH Level 56.4%—

Knowledge MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads

DeepSeek LLM 67B: 7.0 (#313), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 42.2 (#99)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BMiMo-V2.6-Flash
GPQA Diamond24.6%—
LMArena Expert—1501

Multimodal Not comparable

DeepSeek LLM 67B: —, MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 40.5 (#47)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Vision—1259

Multilingual MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads

DeepSeek LLM 67B: 29.4 (#267), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 54.0 (#51)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Non-English10731434
LMArena Chinese11321511
LMArena French—1475
LMArena Russian—1409
LMArena Spanish—1456

Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads

DeepSeek LLM 67B: 55.4 (#277), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 76.8 (#35)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following10791463

Long Context MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads

DeepSeek LLM 67B: 33.1 (#265), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 44.8 (#57)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Longer Query10921463

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads

DeepSeek LLM 67B: 31.6 (#282), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 63.1 (#67)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text11051455
LMArena Creative Writing10671400
LMArena Multi-Turn10821451

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek LLM 67B better than MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is DeepSeek LLM 67B or MiMo-V2.6-Flash better for coding?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.4 versus 31.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek LLM 67B and MiMo-V2.6-Flash share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek LLM 67B has 15 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Flash has 19.

Related comparisons

Go deeper