DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Max) vs Mistral Small 3.2
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (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 Flash Vision (Max) scores 27.8 points higher (34.8 vs 7.0) but costs 8.9× as much to run the benchmark ($1081 vs $122; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Max) when you need intelligence above 7.0, and Mistral Small 3.2 when 7.0 is enough.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Max) | Mistral Small 3.2 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 34.8 | 7.0 | −79.9% Mistral Small 3.2 is 79.9% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,081.42 | $121.78 | −88.7% Mistral Small 3.2 is 88.7% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 15.35s | 12.54s | −18.3% Mistral Small 3.2 is 18.3% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.44 / $1.32 | $0.07 / $0.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Mistral Small 3.2 vs DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Max): 79.9% less intelligence, 88.7% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 18.3% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
- 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 Flash Vision (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-flash-vision/mistral-small-3-2 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-flash-vision/mistral-small-3-2?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill