DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) vs Mistral Small 3.2
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) 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 (Non-reasoning) scores 17.7 points higher (24.7 vs 7.0) but costs 2.0× as much to run the benchmark ($239 vs $122; both mid-range class). Pick DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Mistral Small 3.2.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) | Mistral Small 3.2 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 24.7 | 7.0 | −71.7% Mistral Small 3.2 is 71.7% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $238.91 | $121.78 | −49.0% Mistral Small 3.2 is 49.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 2.71s | 12.77s | +371.2% Mistral Small 3.2 is 371.2% slower |
| 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 (Non-reasoning): 71.7% less intelligence, 49.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 371.2% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
- 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 (Non-reasoning)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-non-reasoning/mistral-small-3-2 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-non-reasoning/mistral-small-3-2?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill