Model comparison
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.
NVIDIASummary
- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 scores higher in 0 categories and MiMo-V2.6-Pro in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads 37.5 to 15.7.
Side by side
| Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | NVIDIA | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 36.7 | 50.3 |
| Released | — | 2026-09-21 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 1.05M |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.43 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.87 |
| Results tracked | 11 | 19 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 38.4 (#177), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 55.5 (#23)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1312 | 1534 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1629 |
| SciCode | — | 60.9% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,158 |
Agentic & Tool Use MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 15.7 (#149), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 37.5 (#35)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 59.5% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 10% | — |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 26.3 (#134), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.1 (#50)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1316 | 1512 |
| CritPt | — | 26.6% |
Math MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 37.5 (#152), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 54.5 (#45)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1360 | 1494 |
| ProofBench | — | 70% |
Knowledge Not comparable
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: —, MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.5 (#92)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1543 |
Multimodal Not comparable
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: —, MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 40.8 (#43)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1264 |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 43.1 (#187), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 56.9 (#14)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1282 | 1474 |
| LMArena Russian | 1284 | 1480 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1529 |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 69.0 (#178), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 78.2 (#12)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1308 | 1493 |
Long Context MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 39.5 (#177), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 46.0 (#27)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1299 | 1501 |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 52.2 (#175), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 66.8 (#33)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1320 | 1492 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1314 | 1468 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1317 | 1464 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 better than MiMo-V2.6-Pro?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 or MiMo-V2.6-Pro better for coding?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 38.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 and MiMo-V2.6-Pro share?
10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 has 11 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 19.