Model comparison
GPT-4.1 nano vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 27.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4.1 nano scores higher in 0 categories and MiMo-V2.6-Flash in 9 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads 53.4 to 24.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 25.9% for GPT-4.1 nano and 51.3% for MiMo-V2.6-Flash.
- Both cost about the same: $0.10 input and $0.40 output per million tokens.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1.05M.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-4.1 nano | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 27.9 | 48.5 |
| Released | 2025-04-14 | 2026-09-21 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1.05M |
| Max output | 33K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | $0.14 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.40 | $0.28 |
| Results tracked | 38 | 19 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 24.1 (#330), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 53.4 (#30)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 25.9% | 51.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1306 | 1504 |
| Aider Polyglot | 8.9% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1637 |
| WeirdML | 19% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-4.1 nano: 26.5 (#104), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: —
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 33% | — |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 8.5 (#349), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 36.5 (#66)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | 12% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1286 | 1482 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 33.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 0% | — |
| DTBench | 52.5% | — |
| LMCA | 5.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 129.62 | — |
Math MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 26.9 (#252), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 51.9 (#52)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1274 | 1468 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 28.9% | — |
| ProofBench | — | 63% |
| Omni-MATH | 36.7% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 70% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1% | — |
Knowledge MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 21.8 (#273), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 42.2 (#99)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1272 | 1501 |
| GPQA Diamond | 48.9% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 55% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 50.7% | — |
Multimodal MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 29.2 (#113), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 40.5 (#47)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1063 | 1259 |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 41.6 (#205), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 54.0 (#51)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1260 | 1434 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1270 | 1511 |
| LMArena Russian | 1261 | 1409 |
| LMArena French | — | 1475 |
| LMArena German | 1288 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1198 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1456 |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 67.8 (#193), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 76.8 (#35)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1267 | 1463 |
| IFEval | 84.3% | — |
Long Context MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 23.7 (#296), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 44.8 (#57)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1283 | 1463 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 25% | — |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 40.5 (#243), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 63.1 (#67)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1285 | 1455 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1260 | 1400 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1277 | 1451 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 946 | — |
| WildBench | 81.2% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-4.1 nano better than MiMo-V2.6-Flash?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 27.9 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, GPT-4.1 nano or MiMo-V2.6-Flash?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; GPT-4.1 nano lists at $0.10 and $0.40.
Is GPT-4.1 nano or MiMo-V2.6-Flash better for coding?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.4 versus 24.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 1.05M.
How many benchmarks do GPT-4.1 nano and MiMo-V2.6-Flash share?
15 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4.1 nano has 38 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Flash has 19.