DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) vs Mistral Small 3.2
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) by DeepSeek or Mistral Small 3.2 by Mistral? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) scores 38.1 points higher (45.1 vs 7.0) but costs 3.7× as much to run the benchmark ($445 vs $122; both mid-range class). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) when you need intelligence above 7.0, and Mistral Small 3.2 when 7.0 is enough.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) | Mistral Small 3.2 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 45.1 | 7.0 | −84.5% Mistral Small 3.2 is 84.5% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $444.60 | $121.78 | −72.6% Mistral Small 3.2 is 72.6% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 16.22s | 11.35s | −30.0% Mistral Small 3.2 is 30.0% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $1.20 | $0.07 / $0.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Mistral Small 3.2 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max): 84.5% less intelligence, 72.6% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 30.0% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
- Mistral Small 3.2 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores 37.90 for $110.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max)Mistral Small 3.2Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017/mistral-small-3-2 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017/mistral-small-3-2?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill