Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 and MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61.9 (C) and 61 (C). MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B leads on reach, risk and documentation and upkeep. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 6359 open weights comparisons

Which one, for what

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 C

Best for Agents or teams with a multi-GPU server, or a provider account, who want DeepSeek's V4 agent model under MIT with a 1M context

Ahead on

  • Agent interface, 75 against 70

Watch for

The smallest 4-bit build is 156.4 GB, so it needs about 188 GB and doesn't fit a 128 GB machine

MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B C

Best for Agents that need a cheap local model to read screenshots, photos and short video on a phone, a laptop or beside a bigger model

Ahead on

  • Reach, 95 against 70
  • Risk, 55 against 50
  • Documentation and upkeep, 48 against 38

Watch for

No limitations section, safety results, agent-use guidance or security contact

Why the edge

Each category where one leads by five points or more, with the reason behind each side's score from its assessment. The numbers are in the table below; this is what they stand for.

Reach MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B +25

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 70

Memory 5, because the smallest build of 4-bit or better from a runtime's own library is LM Studio's MXFP4 GGUF at 156.4 GB, which with a fifth added needs 187.7 GB, more than our 107.4 GB machine and within 256 GB. DeepSeek's own release, 166.9 GB, sits in the same band. Runtimes 25, the cap, from vLLM v0.32.0, SGLang v0.5.22, llama.cpp release b11771, Transformers 5.20.0 and LM Studio's library, with Ollama not counted since its library entry is retired with no models pushed. Builds 10, DeepSeek ships one build, the FP8 and FP4 release itself. Terms 15, MIT with nothing added. Download 10, not gated. Hosted 5, DeepSeek's API moved to V4.1 Flash, but five inference providers on Hugging Face serve this repository live (Together's mapping has gone since 21 October).

MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B 95

Memory 30, OpenBMB's own IQ4_XS GGUF is 0.64 GB, 1.54 GB with the 0.90 GB vision projector, and 1.54 GB × 1.2 = 1.9 GB, which fits 16 GB with room to spare. Runtimes 25, MiniCPMV4_7ForConditionalGeneration in vLLM's registry at v0.33.0, the minicpmv4_7 model type in SGLang's minicpmv.py at v0.5.23, the minicpmv4_7 model in Transformers at v5.22.2, a MiniCPM-V 4.7 guide and conversion code in llama.cpp at b12242, and an openbmb/minicpm-v4.7:1b tag in OpenBMB's namespace on Ollama, read as the 35B-A3B listing's is. Builds 15, OpenBMB publishes AWQ, GPTQ and int4 safetensors builds and a GGUF repository from IQ3_XS to F16, so quantised builds at two precisions or more. Terms 15, Apache 2.0 in the card's metadata and as the LICENSE of OpenBMB's MiniCPM-V repository, an OSI licence. Download 10, gated is false on the main repository and on the GGUF, AWQ, GPTQ and int4 repositories, so the files download with no account or terms. Hosted 0, Hugging Face lists no inference provider for the model (an empty provider mapping on 10 November 2026), and no provider's own list was read. 30 + 25 + 15 + 15 + 10 + 0 = 95.

Documentation and upkeep MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B +10

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 38

Model card 8, the card and the DSpark card it names give architecture, parameters and context, with intended use, limitations, languages and cut-off missing. Training data 5, a general description in the report with no cut-off. Last change 10, a card edit on 1 August 2026, 93 days before 2 November, so past 90 and within 180; deepseek-recipe 0.2.0 (20 October) stays read as a library-wide release, not a change to this model's files. Responsiveness 0, DeepSeek answered none of the 61 discussions, the newest opened on 17 October. Version policy 10, the preview and DSpark copies keep their own repositories and the dated 0731 release says what it supersedes. File health 5, the files agree with each other, but reports of tool-call errors and looping and a pull request for a missing chat template wait without a reply from DeepSeek.

MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B 48

Model card 8, Intended use (image, multi-image and video understanding on device), architecture (early visual-token compression inside the vision encoder) and parameters (1B) are there. Training data 0, no description of the training data on the card. Last change 20, the last commit, on 30 October 2026, updated the card and removed an unused asset folder, eleven days before this check. Responsiveness 0, the repository has no discussions that aren't pull requests (two pull requests in all), so nobody has asked anything yet and the line reads as none answered, as settled in calibration. Version policy 10, MiniCPM-V 4.5 and 4.6 stay in their own repositories and the GitHub README dates each release. File health 10, Config, template and card agree on the architecture and the thinking switch, and no report waits without a reply, since there are no discussions. 8 + 0 + 20 + 0 + 10 + 10 = 48.

Risk MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B +5

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 50

File safety 15, safetensors only, less 10 because prompts are built by running DeepSeek's encoding_dsv4.py from the repository and the card's serving commands pass --trust-remote-code. Provenance 15, the deepseek-ai organisation and a SHA-256 on every shard. Safety evaluation 0, none published. Agent guidance 0, the encoding README's notes about the parser and the reserved developer role are usage notes, read alike for all three DeepSeek listings. Licence risk 15, MIT with no deductions. Security programme 5, for the security@deepseek.com reporting address in DeepSeek's site footer, read as for DeepSeek-V3.2, with no security.txt and no public advisories.

MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B 55

File safety 25, safetensors in the main repository and the AWQ, GPTQ and int4 builds, GGUF in the GGUF build, with no .bin, .pt, .pth or .py files in the main repository. Provenance 15, files in the openbmb organisation that OpenBMB's GitHub README links to (10), with a SHA-256 for both large files in the main repository (5). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card. Agent guidance 0, the card has no limitations or disclaimer section, and no prompt-injection guidance, instruction hierarchy or statement of trained refusals. Licence risk 15, Apache 2.0 has no use policy, field-of-use limit, threshold or change clause, nothing is added on the card, and the LICENSE in OpenBMB's GitHub repository resolved on 10 November 2026. Security programme 0, no SECURITY.md in OpenBMB/MiniCPM-V and no security.txt on openbmb.cn (both 404 on 10 November 2026), and no advisories found. 25 + 15 + 0 + 0 + 15 + 0 = 55.

Agent interface DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 +5

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 75

Chat template 10, there is no Jinja template and the format is given as Python to run. Tool-calling format 10, DeepSeek documents how tools are declared and returned and ships its own parser, but only vLLM's recipe names a runtime parser, so the 25 line isn't met. Trained tool calling 20, several invoke elements in one call block. Structured output 15, DeepSeek's deepseek-recipe library documents JSON Schema response formats for V4 prompts. Reasoning control 10, chat mode with no thinking and three effort levels in thinking mode, with reasoning returned as reasoning_content. Context 10, 1M tokens trained.

MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B 70

Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository, 7,249 characters. Tool-calling format 10, the card shows tools declared in the OpenAI tools array in a request to Transformers' server, but not how a call comes back, and names no parser for vLLM or SGLang. Trained tool calling 20, the template loops over tool_calls, so it renders several calls in one assistant turn, and the card gives a tool-calling request as a supported use. Structured output 0, Neither JSON nor JSON Schema output is documented or claimed for the model on the card. Reasoning control 10, the card passes enable_thinking per request in its examples, the template has been off by default since 19 October 2026, and the GGUF repository keeps thinking builds in their own folder. Context 10, 262,144 tokens, max_position_embeddings in the text config. 20 + 10 + 20 + 0 + 10 + 10 = 70.

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runDeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731MiniCPM-V 4.7 1BEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%257095MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B +25
Risk20%205055MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B +5
Agent interface10%107570DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 +5
Documentation and upkeep10%103848MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B +10
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 61.9/100C 61/100

Facts side by side

FactDeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorDeepSeekOpenBMB
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceMITApache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-07-312026-10-30
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Agent reviews2.5/5 (4)none

How the scores have moved

Verdicts

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731

A long-context agent cousin under MIT with documented tool calls, three reasoning effort levels and support in every major runtime but Ollama. It needs about 190 to 200 GB of memory, though five inference providers serve it. The main risks are prompts built from DeepSeek's Python, no published safety results and no answers in its repository.

MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B

A vision-language cousin small enough for a phone, under plain Apache 2.0, that every runtime we count can load. The projector is bigger than the language model, so plan for about 2 GB. The card says nothing about limits or training data and doesn't show how a tool call comes back.

Before you call either

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731

  1. vllm serve deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 --trust-remote-code --kv-cache-dtype fp8 --block-size 256 --data-parallel-size 4 --enable-expert-parallel --moe-backend deep_gemm_mega_moe --attention-config '{"use_fp4_indexer_cache": true}' --speculative-config '{"method":"dspark","num_speculative_tokens":7,"draft_sample_method":"greedy"}' --tokenizer-mode deepseek_v4 --tool-call-parser deepseek_v4 --enable-auto-tool-choice --reasoning-parser deepseek_v4 (the card's 4x GB300 example plus the parser flags from vLLM's recipe)
  2. Build prompts with encoding_dsv4.py, deepseek-recipe's V4 encoder or vLLM's --tokenizer-mode deepseek_v4, since the repository has no Jinja template
  3. Tool calls come back in a DSML tool_calls block with invoke elements, string parameters carry string="true" and JSON values string="false"
  4. Set temperature 1.0 and top_p 0.95 for agent work, and allow up to 384K output tokens at reasoning effort high or max
  5. Without the hardware, call it through a Hugging Face inference provider (DeepInfra, Novita, Baseten, Scaleway, Featherless), not DeepSeek's API, where deepseek-v4-flash now means V4.1 Flash
  6. LM Studio's library build is a 156.4 GB MXFP4 GGUF and LM Studio states 156 GB minimum system memory

MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B

  1. Start it with llama-server -hf openbmb/MiniCPM-V-4.7-1B-gguf:Q4_K_M --jinja, or ollama run openbmb/minicpm-v4.7:1b
  2. For image input in llama.cpp add mmproj-model-f16.gguf, or the smaller 4x projector
  3. The GGUF files at the repository root have thinking off. Use the files in thinking/ when you want the trace
  4. Use temperature 0.7, top_p 0.95 and top_k 100 in instruct mode, as the card recommends
  5. Check tool calls in your runtime first, since the card names no parser
  6. Validate JSON output yourself, since structured output isn't documented

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 or MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B?

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 and MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61.9 (C) and 61 (C). MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B leads on reach, risk and documentation and upkeep.

Other comparisons with DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 or MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B

Machine-readable

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.