Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Flash vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 39.3 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Flash scores higher in 2 categories and MiMo-V2.6-Pro in 8 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads 43.1 to 18.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is CritPt: 1.1% for Gemini 2.5 Flash and 26.6% for MiMo-V2.6-Pro.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $2.50 for Gemini 2.5 Flash.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.5 Flash | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | |
| Noometry Index | 39.3 | 50.3 |
| Released | 2025-04-17 | 2026-09-21 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1.05M |
| Max output | 66K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $0.43 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.50 | $0.87 |
| Results tracked | 54 | 19 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 35.8 (#220), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 55.5 (#23)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1424 | 1534 |
| ALE-Bench | 661.88 | 1,158 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 28.7% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 55.1% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1629 |
| SciCode | — | 60.9% |
| WeirdML | 41.9% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 30.8 (#74), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 37.5 (#35)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 17.1% | — |
| APEX-Agents | — | 59.5% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 56.2% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | 41.1% | — |
| BALROG | 33.5% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 548.84 | — |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 18.1 (#286), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.1 (#50)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 1.1% | 26.6% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1422 | 1512 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 2.5% | — |
| SimpleBench | 41.2% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 56.8% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 33.3% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 2.7% | — |
| DTBench | 76.5% | — |
| LMCA | 27.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 143.03 | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.6 | — |
Math MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 39.9 (#98), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 54.5 (#45)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1415 | 1494 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 73.1% | — |
| ProofBench | — | 70% |
| Omni-MATH | 38.5% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 36.4 (#168), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.5 (#92)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1426 | 1543 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 12.1% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 63.9% | — |
| Confabulations | 16.8% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.8% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 39% | — |
Multimodal Too close to call
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 41.8 (#32), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 40.8 (#43)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1253 | 1264 |
| GeoBench | 76% | — |
| VPCT | 46.2% | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 36.9% | — |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 52.3 (#88), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 56.9 (#14)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1409 | 1474 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1450 | 1529 |
| LMArena Russian | 1415 | 1480 |
| LMArena French | 1433 | — |
| LMArena German | 1418 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1405 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1385 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1421 | — |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 75.7 (#54), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 78.2 (#12)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1405 | 1493 |
| IFEval | 89.8% | — |
Long Context Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 47.5 (#17), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 46.0 (#27)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1419 | 1501 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 77.8% | — |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 53.8 (#157), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 66.8 (#33)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1417 | 1492 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1400 | 1468 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1408 | 1464 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 76.5% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1137 | — |
| WildBench | 81.7% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash better than MiMo-V2.6-Pro?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 39.3 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash or MiMo-V2.6-Pro?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.43 per million input tokens and $0.87 per million output tokens; Gemini 2.5 Flash lists at $0.30 and $2.50.
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash or MiMo-V2.6-Pro better for coding?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 35.8 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both accept 1.05M tokens.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Flash and MiMo-V2.6-Pro share?
15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash has 54 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 19.