Model comparison

GLM-4.6V vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.6V Z.ai (Zhipu)

41.3

Rank #137 Confirmed

MiMo-V2.6-Pro Xiaomi

50.3

Rank #49 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6V scores higher in 0 categories and MiMo-V2.6-Pro in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads 43.1 to 27.6.
  • GLM-4.6V is cheaper at $0.30 / $0.90 per million input/output tokens, against $0.43 / $0.87 for MiMo-V2.6-Pro.
  • MiMo-V2.6-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 128K.

Side by side

GLM-4.6V and MiMo-V2.6-Pro specifications
GLM-4.6VMiMo-V2.6-Pro
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Xiaomi
Noometry Index41.350.3
Released2025-12-082026-09-21
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window128K1.05M
Max output33K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.30$0.43
Output $ / M tokens$0.90$0.87
Results tracked1219

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

GLM-4.6V: 40.9 (#128), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 55.5 (#23)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6VMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Coding13901534
LMArena WebDev—1629
SciCode—60.9%
ALE-Bench—1,158

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GLM-4.6V: —, MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 37.5 (#35)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6VMiMo-V2.6-Pro
APEX-Agents—59.5%

Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

GLM-4.6V: 27.6 (#115), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.1 (#50)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6VMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Hard Prompts13681512
CritPt—26.6%

Math Not comparable

GLM-4.6V: —, MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 54.5 (#45)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6VMiMo-V2.6-Pro
ProofBench—70%
LMArena Math—1494

Knowledge MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

GLM-4.6V: 38.0 (#149), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.5 (#92)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6VMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Expert13711543

Multimodal MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

GLM-4.6V: 34.8 (#90), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 40.8 (#43)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6VMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Vision11641264

Multilingual MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

GLM-4.6V: 48.6 (#141), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 56.9 (#14)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6VMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Non-English13591474
LMArena Chinese14251529
LMArena Russian13401480

Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

GLM-4.6V: 71.4 (#151), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 78.2 (#12)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6VMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Instruction Following13521493

Long Context MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#143), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 46.0 (#27)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6VMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Longer Query13581501

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

GLM-4.6V: 56.6 (#137), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 66.8 (#33)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.6VMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Text13771492
LMArena Creative Writing13471468
LMArena Multi-Turn13601464

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.6V better than MiMo-V2.6-Pro?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.6V or MiMo-V2.6-Pro?

GLM-4.6V is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $0.90 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2.6-Pro lists at $0.43 and $0.87.

Is GLM-4.6V or MiMo-V2.6-Pro better for coding?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 40.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6V and MiMo-V2.6-Pro share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6V has 12 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 19.

Related comparisons

Go deeper