Model comparison
GPT-5.1-Codex vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.1-Codex scores higher in 1 category and MiMo-V2.6-Pro in 2 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads 54.5 to 30.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 9% for GPT-5.1-Codex and 70% for MiMo-V2.6-Pro.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $10 for GPT-5.1-Codex.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 400K.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-5.1-Codex | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 38.6 | 50.3 |
| Released | 2025-11-12 | 2026-09-21 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 400K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 128K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | $0.43 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | $0.87 |
| Results tracked | 6 | 19 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
GPT-5.1-Codex: 41.9 (#116), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 55.5 (#23)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1337 | 1629 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,245 | 1,158 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 66% | — |
| SciCode | — | 60.9% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1534 |
Agentic & Tool Use Too close to call
GPT-5.1-Codex: 38.0 (#33), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 37.5 (#35)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 60.4% | — |
| APEX-Agents | — | 59.5% |
| METR Time Horizons | 70.8% | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.1 (#50)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | — | 26.6% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1512 |
Math MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
GPT-5.1-Codex: 30.3 (#235), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 54.5 (#45)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 9% | 70% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1494 |
Knowledge Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.5 (#92)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1543 |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 40.8 (#43)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1264 |
Multilingual Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 56.9 (#14)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1474 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1529 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1480 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 78.2 (#12)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1493 |
Long Context Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 46.0 (#27)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1501 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
GPT-5.1-Codex: —, MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 66.8 (#33)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1-Codex | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1492 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1468 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1464 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.1-Codex better than MiMo-V2.6-Pro?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.1-Codex 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; GPT-5.1-Codex lists at $1.25 and $10.
Is GPT-5.1-Codex or MiMo-V2.6-Pro better for coding?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 41.9 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 400K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.1-Codex and MiMo-V2.6-Pro share?
3 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.1-Codex has 6 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 19.