Model comparison
GPT-4.1 vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 35.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4.1 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 math, where MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads 51.9 to 22.3.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $8 for GPT-4.1.
- 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 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 35.9 | 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 | $2 | $0.14 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $8 | $0.28 |
| Results tracked | 52 | 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: 34.4 (#238), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 53.4 (#30)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1391 | 1504 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 48.5% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 39.6% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 52.4% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1637 |
| SciCode | — | 51.3% |
| WeirdML | 39% | — |
| CadEval | 42% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 558.1 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-4.1: 34.7 (#43), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: —
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 54% | — |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
GPT-4.1: 11.7 (#339), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 36.5 (#66)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1384 | 1482 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0.4% | — |
| SimpleBench | 27% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 52.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 5.5% | — |
| CritPt | — | 12% |
| Chess Puzzles | 6% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 2.2% | — |
| DTBench | 68.3% | — |
| LMCA | 25.6% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 136.78 | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.5 | — |
Math MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
GPT-4.1: 22.3 (#280), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 51.9 (#52)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1370 | 1468 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 6% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 38.3% | — |
| ProofBench | — | 63% |
| Omni-MATH | 47.1% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 83% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 5.5% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 0% | — |
Knowledge MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
GPT-4.1: 37.1 (#160), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 42.2 (#99)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1364 | 1501 |
| GPQA Diamond | 66.9% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 5.4% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 31.1% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 81.1% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 5.6% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 65.9% | — |
Multimodal MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
GPT-4.1: 38.2 (#67), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 40.5 (#47)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1211 | 1259 |
| GeoBench | 72% | — |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
GPT-4.1: 49.4 (#133), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 54.0 (#51)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1370 | 1434 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1382 | 1511 |
| LMArena French | 1382 | 1475 |
| LMArena Russian | 1377 | 1409 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1376 | 1456 |
| LMArena German | 1381 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1319 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1339 | — |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
GPT-4.1: 71.3 (#153), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 76.8 (#35)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1367 | 1463 |
| IFEval | 83.8% | — |
Long Context MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
GPT-4.1: 40.0 (#163), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 44.8 (#57)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1385 | 1463 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 63.9% | — |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
GPT-4.1: 57.6 (#125), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 63.1 (#67)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1383 | 1455 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1363 | 1400 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1398 | 1451 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1420 | — |
| WildBench | 85.4% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-4.1 better than MiMo-V2.6-Flash?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 35.9 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, GPT-4.1 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 lists at $2 and $8.
Is GPT-4.1 or MiMo-V2.6-Flash better for coding?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.4 versus 34.4 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 and MiMo-V2.6-Flash share?
15 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4.1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Flash has 19.