Model comparison
Kimi K2.6 vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.7 to 45.2 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2.5-Pro costs 3.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Kimi K2.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 27 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 27 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K2.6 scores higher in 5 categories and MiMo-V2.5-Pro in 3 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Kimi K2.6 leads 57.0 to 40.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 87.2% for Kimi K2.6 and 34.4% for MiMo-V2.5-Pro.
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $0.95 / $4 for Kimi K2.6.
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 262K.
Side by side
| Kimi K2.6 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Moonshot AI | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 47.7 | 45.2 |
| Released | 2026-04-20 | 2026-04-22 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 262K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 262K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.95 | $0.43 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $4 | $0.87 |
| Results tracked | 51 | 27 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 50.7 (#43), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 47.4 (#60)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1509 | 1479 |
| SciCode | 53.5% | 50.2% |
| LMArena Coding | 1488 | 1503 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,093 | 899.8 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 76.7% | — |
| WeirdML | 55.9% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Kimi K2.6: 21.9 (#137), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| OSWorld 2.0 | 4.6% | — |
| ExploitBench | 18.4% | — |
| GBAEval | 0.9% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 12% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 6,205 | — |
Reasoning Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 40.5 (#55), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 26.8 (#130)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 87.2% | 34.4% |
| CritPt | 8% | 4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1470 | 1488 |
| DTBench | 90.9% | 84.5% |
| LMCA | 37.3% | 29.5% |
| Chess Puzzles | 26% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 2.4% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 18% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 151.05 | — |
Math Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 57.0 (#41), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 40.0 (#96)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 16% | 22% |
| LMArena Math | 1475 | 1481 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 57.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 25.6% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 72.9% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 96.1% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 39% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 14.6% | — |
Knowledge Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 54.0 (#54), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 42.2 (#98)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1491 | 1503 |
| GPQA Diamond | 90.8% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 34.9% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.8% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Kimi K2.6: 31.6 (#103), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1283 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 3.9% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 21.7% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1451 | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
Kimi K2.6: 54.9 (#37), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 55.1 (#34)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1446 | 1449 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1521 | 1507 |
| LMArena French | 1471 | 1488 |
| LMArena German | 1450 | 1458 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1443 | 1412 |
| LMArena Korean | 1427 | 1437 |
| LMArena Russian | 1446 | 1450 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1464 | 1471 |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
Kimi K2.6: 76.3 (#43), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 77.5 (#21)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1451 | 1477 |
Long Context Too close to call
Kimi K2.6: 44.9 (#52), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 45.4 (#37)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1468 | 1483 |
Writing & Preference Kimi K2.6 leads
Kimi K2.6: 68.5 (#26), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 65.3 (#49)
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1455 | 1465 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1434 | 1440 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1725 | 1493 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1202 | 1208 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1453 | 1477 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Kimi K2.6 better than MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
Kimi K2.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.7 to 45.2 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2.5-Pro costs 3.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Kimi K2.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Kimi K2.6 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; Kimi K2.6 lists at $0.95 and $4.
Is Kimi K2.6 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro better for coding?
Kimi K2.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.7 versus 47.4 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do Kimi K2.6 and MiMo-V2.5-Pro share?
27 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K2.6 has 51 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.5-Pro has 27.