Model comparison

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

GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.2 to 44.4 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2.6-Flash costs 330× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.2 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

GPT-5.2 Pro OpenAI

52.2

Rank #34 Reported

MiMo-V2.6-Flash Xiaomi

44.4

Rank #74 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in math, where GPT-5.2 Pro leads 64.8 to 37.4.
  • MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $21 / $168 for GPT-5.2 Pro.
  • 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 Pro and MiMo-V2.6-Flash specifications
GPT-5.2 ProMiMo-V2.6-Flash
ProviderOpenAIXiaomi
Noometry Index52.244.4
Released2025-12-112026-09-22
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window400K1.05M
Max output128K131K
Input $ / M tokens$21$0.14
Output $ / M tokens$168$0.28
Results tracked813

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

GPT-5.2 Pro: —, MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 44.3 (#68)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 ProMiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Coding—1516

Reasoning GPT-5.2 Pro leads

GPT-5.2 Pro: 51.8 (#31), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 29.6 (#82)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 ProMiMo-V2.6-Flash
ARC-AGI-254.2%—
SimpleBench57.4%—
NYT Connections (extended)79.3%—
ARC-AGI-190.5%—
LMArena Hard Prompts—1481
Epoch Capabilities Index155.41—

Math GPT-5.2 Pro leads

GPT-5.2 Pro: 64.8 (#23), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 37.4 (#97)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5.2 ProMiMo-V2.6-Flash
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)74%—
FrontierMath Tier 446%—
LMArena Math—1477
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)31.3%—

Knowledge Not comparable

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

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

Multimodal Not comparable

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

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

Multilingual Not comparable

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

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

Instruction Following Not comparable

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

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

Long Context Not comparable

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

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

Writing & Preference Not comparable

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

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

Frequently asked questions

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

GPT-5.2 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 52.2 to 44.4 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2.6-Flash costs 330× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.2 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.2 Pro 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 Pro lists at $21 and $168.

Which has the bigger context window?

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

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

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.2 Pro has 8 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Flash has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper