Model comparison
GPT-6.1 Sol vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro
GPT-6.1 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 65.6 to 45.2 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2.5-Pro costs 7.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-6.1 Sol's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-6.1 Sol scores higher in 4 categories and MiMo-V2.5-Pro in 4 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-6.1 Sol leads 81.9 to 26.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 99% for GPT-6.1 Sol and 22% for MiMo-V2.5-Pro.
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $10 for GPT-6.1 Sol.
- GPT-6.1 Sol accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1.05M.
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-6.1 Sol | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 65.6 | 45.2 |
| Released | 2026-09-29 | 2026-04-22 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1.05M |
| Max output | 128K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | $0.43 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | $0.87 |
| Results tracked | 34 | 27 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 63.2 (#8), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 47.4 (#60)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1755 | 1479 |
| SciCode | 55.8% | 50.2% |
| LMArena Coding | 1487 | 1503 |
| DeepSWE | 75.2% | — |
| FrontierCode | 50.2% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 899.8 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-6.1 Sol: 39.6 (#26), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: —
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 60% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 32% | — |
Reasoning GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 81.9 (#2), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 26.8 (#130)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 95.5% | 34.4% |
| CritPt | 31.7% | 4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1466 | 1488 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 94.2% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 98.5% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 61% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 54.3% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 80% | — |
| DTBench | — | 84.5% |
| LMCA | — | 29.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 166.09 | — |
Math GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 93.7 (#1), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 40.0 (#96)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 99% | 22% |
| LMArena Math | 1464 | 1481 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 93.7% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 100% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | — |
Knowledge GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 71.8 (#4), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 42.2 (#98)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1502 | 1503 |
| GPQA Diamond | 95.4% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 73.9% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-6.1 Sol: 52.7 (#5), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: —
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1288 | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 80% | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
GPT-6.1 Sol: 54.3 (#46), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 55.1 (#34)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1438 | 1449 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1477 | 1507 |
| LMArena Russian | 1455 | 1450 |
| LMArena French | — | 1488 |
| LMArena German | — | 1458 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1412 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1437 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1471 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
GPT-6.1 Sol: 77.0 (#29), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 77.5 (#21)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1468 | 1477 |
Long Context Too close to call
GPT-6.1 Sol: 44.9 (#54), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 45.4 (#37)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1465 | 1483 |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 63.6 (#63), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 65.3 (#49)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1447 | 1465 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1432 | 1440 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1449 | 1477 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1493 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1208 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-6.1 Sol better than MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
GPT-6.1 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 65.6 to 45.2 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2.5-Pro costs 7.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-6.1 Sol's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-6.1 Sol or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.43 per million input tokens and $0.87 per million output tokens; GPT-6.1 Sol lists at $2 and $10.
Is GPT-6.1 Sol or MiMo-V2.5-Pro better for coding?
GPT-6.1 Sol scores higher on coding benchmarks: 63.2 versus 47.4 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-6.1 Sol does, with 1.05M tokens against 1.05M.
How many benchmarks do GPT-6.1 Sol and MiMo-V2.5-Pro share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-6.1 Sol has 34 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.5-Pro has 27.