Towards AITowards AIToneBench

Model Comparison

MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed vs DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813

Too close to call: the best configurations, MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on) and DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (max), are 47 Elo apart, and their 95% ranges overlap. Among 78 models, each ranked by its best configuration, MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed is #17 and DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 is #21. Cost per script: $0.177 for MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on) and $0.077 for DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (max).

Last updated , from board data generated at 01:13 UTC.

MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed
1997 Writing Elo of MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on), its best configuration#17 of 78 models · 80.6/100 Writing Score · $0.177 per script1 configuration on the board
DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813
1950 Writing Elo of DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (max), its best configuration#21 of 78 models · 80.1/100 Writing Score · $0.077 per script2 configurations on the board

Picks and Verdict

PickMiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed

MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on)

Pick MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on) when someone is waiting on the draft, since it returns a script in half a minute against 8.9 minutes for DeepSeek at max.

PickDeepSeek V4 Pro 0813

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (max)

Pick DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (max) for batches that can wait, at $0.077 a script for writing the board can't separate from MiMo's at $0.177.

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 needs 8.9 minutes at max for a script that MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed returns in half a minute, and the board can't tell me which draft is better. MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on) and DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (max) are 47 Elo apart with overlapping 95% ranges, the #17 model of 78 against the #21 model, each ranked by its best setting. So I'd decide on the wait and the price. DeepSeek costs $0.077 a script, less than half of MiMo's $0.177. DeepSeek does have a quicker setting, but it doesn't solve the wait. DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (high) takes 1.3 minutes, still slower than MiMo, and it falls 600 Elo under its own max setting. Max is the only DeepSeek setting I'd run. On the metrics, MiMo sounds a little more like me, about two points up on tone, while DeepSeek lands closer to the requested length and its drafts are a bit steadier. For a batch that can sit in a queue, I'd take DeepSeek at max. When someone is waiting on the draft, MiMo is worth the extra ten cents.

How to Read the Writing Score, Writing Elo and 95% Ranges

Writing Score and Writing Elo. The Writing Score (0 to 100) is the weighted average of the nine metric scores: seven from the judges, Length Adherence from code and the Slop Score half from each. The Writing Elo is a rating from pairwise comparisons: on each script, each configuration's average across its drafts is compared with every other configuration's, and gaps within the draft-to-draft variation count as draws. Elo rewards winning often, so the two can put configurations in a different order.

Elo ranges. Each 95% range shows how far a configuration's Elo could move if the drafts had come out slightly differently. It comes from resampling every configuration's recorded draft scores on each reference script and ranking again. Comparing two separate ranges does not test the Elo gap between them: ranges far apart are strong evidence for the order, and overlapping ranges do not mean a tie. The reference scripts stay fixed, so the ranges say nothing about new scripts. The methodology page has the full description.

All Thinking Levels of Both Models

Every ranked configuration of MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed and DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813, scored on the same 10 scripts by the same four judges.

How to Read the Chart
  • Each row is one configuration: the model at one thinking level. The dot is its Writing Elo, a rating from pairwise comparisons of the scores on each script, and the bar is its 95% range: how far that Elo could move if the drafts had come out slightly differently.
  • When two bars overlap, the board cannot order those two configurations. Bars far apart are strong evidence for the order.
  • The table under the chart lists the same configurations in the same order and adds the Writing Score (the 0 to 100 consensus of the judges and code), cost, time and configuration rank (the place among all configurations on the board).
MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeedDeepSeek V4 Pro 0813
ConfigurationWriting Elo95% RangeWriting ScoreCost / ScriptTime / ScriptReasoning TokensConfiguration Rank
MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on)19971954 to 203780.6$0.1770.5 min10,745#34
DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (max)19501906 to 198980.1$0.0778.9 min31,573#40
DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (high)13501272 to 142872.3$0.0311.3 min8,879#81

Cost is one script at the API list price of the route used, uncached and without judging. Time is the average for one accepted script, retries included.

Computed Findings Across Thinking Levels

Each finding is computed from the configurations above. Where two 95% ranges overlap, the board cannot order those two configurations.

Two Chosen Configurations Compared

Pick one configuration of each model to compare their metric scores, consistency across drafts and per-script scores. Each menu starts on the model's best configuration.

Scores by Metric

MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on)DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (max)Solid bar: higher score in that row

MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on) scores higher on five of the nine metrics and DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (max) on four. Weighted by each metric's share of the Writing Score, Tone & Voice Match does the most to put MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on) ahead, with a 1.9-point lead on that metric. The weight beside each metric is its share of the Writing Score.

Tone & Voice Match19% weight
78.2
76.3
Writing Craft & Clarity13% weight
78.0
76.5
Substance, Accuracy & Value15% weight
82.7
81.7
Continuity & Emotion14% weight
80.0
80.2
YouTube Best Practices12% weight
78.6
78.9
Hook Strength10% weight
80.6
80.9
Length Adherence8% weight
89.4
93.4
Slop Score5% weight
83.8
81.4
Visual Cue Quality4% weight
79.3
77.6

Consistency Across Drafts

MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on)DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (max)
Score spread across drafts (±)1.871.48
Lowest script score78.5 Script 478.2 Script 10
Highest script score82.3 Script 781.5 Script 6
Range across scripts3.83.3

Spread is how much the Writing Score moves between a configuration's drafts, and lower is steadier. Green marks the better number in each row.

Scores by Script

Writing Score on each reference script. Gap is MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on) minus DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (max), and the higher score is in bold.

ScriptMiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on)DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (max)Gap
Script 1 opinion / warning explainer79.079.5-0.5
Script 2 news-analysis / skeptical explainer80.680.60.0
Script 3 personal roadmap / opinion80.980.8+0.1
Script 4 short explainer78.578.50.0
Script 5 news-analysis / opinion explainer81.280.9+0.3
Script 6 founder announcement / personal origin story81.281.5-0.3
Script 7 personal technical walkthrough / agentic workflow case study82.381.1+1.2
Script 8 product release announcement / personal observation81.380.2+1.1
Script 9 career guide / hiring analysis82.379.9+2.4
Script 10 engineering process walkthrough / presentation adaptation78.878.2+0.6

Compare With Another Model

Pick a second model. A pair with its own written match-up opens that page, and any other pair opens in the comparison tool.

Nearby Match-Ups by Best Writing Elo

Every configuration wrote five drafts for each of the same 10 briefs, from the same prompt. Generation was closed-book, with the prompt as the only source and no web search or other tools. Each judge scores every draft once: Claude Opus 5.5 at medium effort through the Claude Code subscription, GPT-6.1 Sol at medium reasoning through the Codex CLI, GLM 5.3 Flash through OpenRouter, and Jev 1.13, a typed judge from TypeSafe that answers each metric as a multiple-choice question. The channel's finished script is their reference for the voice, and it gets no score on the board itself.

← All comparisons