Model comparison
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and MiMo-V2.6-Flash score almost the same on the Noometry Index (48.6 vs 48.5), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) scores higher in 5 categories and MiMo-V2.6-Flash in 4 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads 52.3 to 36.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 14% for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and 63% for MiMo-V2.6-Flash.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $2.50 for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning).
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 48.6 | 48.5 |
| Released | 2026-02-17 | 2026-09-21 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1M | 1.05M |
| Max output | 30K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | $0.14 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.50 | $0.28 |
| Results tracked | 46 | 19 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 42.1 (#112), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 53.4 (#30)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1375 | 1637 |
| LMArena Coding | 1459 | 1504 |
| SciCode | — | 51.3% |
| WeirdML | 52.3% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,150 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 34.4 (#46), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 57.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 18% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1189 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 4,663 | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.3 (#32), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 36.5 (#66)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1451 | 1482 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 65.1% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 75% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 85.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 89.5% | — |
| CritPt | — | 12% |
| Chess Puzzles | 24% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 63.8% | — |
| DTBench | 90.1% | — |
| LMCA | 38.7% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 151.98 | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.4 | — |
Math MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 48.2 (#65), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 51.9 (#52)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 14% | 63% |
| LMArena Math | 1455 | 1468 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 44.9% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 17.1% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 92.2% | — |
Knowledge Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.8 (#60), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 42.2 (#99)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1439 | 1501 |
| GPQA Diamond | 89.3% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 30.2% | — |
Multimodal MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 33.3 (#98), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 40.5 (#47)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1263 | 1259 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 0% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1416 | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 54.5 (#40), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 54.0 (#51)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1441 | 1434 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1481 | 1511 |
| LMArena French | 1476 | 1475 |
| LMArena Russian | 1458 | 1409 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1443 | 1456 |
| LMArena German | 1465 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1449 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1417 | — |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 74.8 (#83), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 76.8 (#35)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1420 | 1463 |
Long Context Too close to call
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 45.5 (#34), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 44.8 (#57)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1437 | 1463 |
| CL-bench | 22.2% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 11.9% | — |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 65.7 (#44), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 63.1 (#67)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1451 | 1455 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1438 | 1400 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1456 | 1451 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1574 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) better than MiMo-V2.6-Flash?
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and MiMo-V2.6-Flash score almost the same on the Noometry Index (48.6 vs 48.5), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) 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; Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) lists at $1.25 and $2.50.
Is Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) or MiMo-V2.6-Flash better for coding?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.4 versus 42.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) and MiMo-V2.6-Flash share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) has 46 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Flash has 19.