Model comparison
GPT-5.4 nano vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.4 to 41.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.4 nano scores higher in 1 category and MiMo-V2.6-Flash in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads 63.9 to 55.9.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $0.20 / $1.25 for GPT-5.4 nano.
- 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-5.4 nano | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 41.9 | 44.4 |
| Released | 2026-03-17 | 2026-09-22 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 400K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 128K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.20 | $0.14 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.25 | $0.28 |
| Results tracked | 40 | 13 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 43.1 (#82), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 44.3 (#68)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1404 | 1516 |
| SciCode | 46.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 49.2% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,005 | — |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 23.8 (#159), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 29.6 (#82)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1380 | 1481 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 5.7% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 39.7% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 51.5% | — |
| CritPt | 9.3% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 30% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 9% | — |
| DTBench | 80.3% | — |
| LMCA | 36.9% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.78 | — |
| ForecastBench | 57.3 | — |
Math GPT-5.4 nano leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 40.7 (#76), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 37.4 (#97)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1406 | 1477 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 44.9% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 12.2% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 87.8% | — |
| ProofBench | 5% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 25.9% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 6.3% | — |
Knowledge Too close to call
GPT-5.4 nano: 41.8 (#94), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 42.0 (#91)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1397 | 1516 |
| GPQA Diamond | 78.5% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 11.7% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 3.1% | — |
Multimodal MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 36.0 (#73), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 40.2 (#39)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1196 | 1266 |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 48.8 (#136), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 54.6 (#41)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | 1439 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1391 | 1501 |
| LMArena Russian | 1363 | 1424 |
| LMArena French | 1396 | — |
| LMArena German | 1368 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1342 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1321 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1368 | — |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 72.1 (#139), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 77.0 (#33)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1362 | 1463 |
Long Context MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 41.6 (#131), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 44.8 (#52)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1365 | 1465 |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 55.9 (#137), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 63.9 (#61)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1372 | 1459 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1313 | 1408 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1382 | 1460 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.4 nano better than MiMo-V2.6-Flash?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.4 to 41.9 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.4 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-5.4 nano lists at $0.20 and $1.25.
Is GPT-5.4 nano or MiMo-V2.6-Flash better for coding?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.3 versus 43.1 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-5.4 nano and MiMo-V2.6-Flash share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.4 nano has 40 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Flash has 13.