Model comparison

GPT-5.2 Codex vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.4 to 42.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

GPT-5.2 Codex OpenAI

42.2

Rank #107 Reported

MiMo-V2.6-Flash Xiaomi

44.4

Rank #74 Confirmed

Summary

  • MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $1.75 / $14 for GPT-5.2 Codex.
  • MiMo-V2.6-Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 400K.
  • MiMo-V2.6-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GPT-5.2 Codex and MiMo-V2.6-Flash specifications
GPT-5.2 CodexMiMo-V2.6-Flash
ProviderOpenAIXiaomi
Noometry Index42.244.4
Released2025-12-182026-09-22
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window400K1.05M
Max output128K131K
Input $ / M tokens$1.75$0.14
Output $ / M tokens$14$0.28
Results tracked513

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

Category by category

Coding GPT-5.2 Codex leads

GPT-5.2 Codex: 45.4 (#66), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 44.3 (#68)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexMiMo-V2.6-Flash
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)72.8%—
LMArena WebDev1339—
SWE-bench Multilingual66.3%—
LMArena Coding—1516
ALE-Bench1,300—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: 40.7 (#20), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexMiMo-V2.6-Flash
Terminal-Bench66.5%—

Reasoning Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 29.6 (#82)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Hard Prompts—1481

Math Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 37.4 (#97)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Math—1477

Knowledge Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 42.0 (#91)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Expert—1516

Multimodal Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 40.2 (#39)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Vision—1266

Multilingual Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 54.6 (#41)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Non-English—1439
LMArena Chinese—1501
LMArena Russian—1424

Instruction Following Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 77.0 (#33)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following—1463

Long Context Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 44.8 (#52)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Longer Query—1465

Writing & Preference Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Codex: —, MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 63.9 (#61)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 CodexMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text—1459
LMArena Creative Writing—1408
LMArena Multi-Turn—1460

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-5.2 Codex better than MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.4 to 42.2 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.2 Codex 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-5.2 Codex lists at $1.75 and $14.

Is GPT-5.2 Codex or MiMo-V2.6-Flash better for coding?

GPT-5.2 Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 45.4 versus 44.3 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 400K.

How many benchmarks do GPT-5.2 Codex and MiMo-V2.6-Flash share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.2 Codex has 5 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Flash has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper