Model comparison
Llama 3.2 1B vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 2.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2.6-Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.2 1B scores higher in 0 categories 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 63.1 to 21.3.
- Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper at $0.027 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.14 / $0.28 for MiMo-V2.6-Flash.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 60K.
Side by side
| Llama 3.2 1B | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 20.1 | 48.5 |
| Released | 2024-09-24 | 2026-09-21 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 60K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 54K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.027 | $0.14 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.20 | $0.28 |
| Results tracked | 22 | 19 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 21.1 (#338), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 53.4 (#30)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1070 | 1504 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1637 |
| SciCode | — | 51.3% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 8.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 11.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Llama 3.2 1B: 14.6 (#150), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 10.8% | — |
| BALROG | 6.6% | — |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 16.2 (#308), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 36.5 (#66)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1044 | 1482 |
| CritPt | — | 12% |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 101.99 | — |
Math MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 10.4 (#313), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 51.9 (#52)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1086 | 1468 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.6% | — |
| ProofBench | — | 63% |
Knowledge MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#312), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 42.2 (#99)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1007 | 1501 |
| GPQA Diamond | 23.9% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Llama 3.2 1B: —, MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 40.5 (#47)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1259 |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 23.8 (#292), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 54.0 (#51)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 973 | 1434 |
| LMArena Chinese | 959 | 1511 |
| LMArena Russian | 941 | 1409 |
| LMArena French | — | 1475 |
| LMArena German | 1014 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1456 |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 52.4 (#290), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 76.8 (#35)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1031 | 1463 |
Long Context MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#274), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 44.8 (#57)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1050 | 1463 |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 21.3 (#310), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 63.1 (#67)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1055 | 1455 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1033 | 1400 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1030 | 1451 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 200 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 3.2 1B better than MiMo-V2.6-Flash?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 2.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2.6-Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Llama 3.2 1B or MiMo-V2.6-Flash?
Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper. It lists at $0.027 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2.6-Flash lists at $0.14 and $0.28.
Is Llama 3.2 1B or MiMo-V2.6-Flash better for coding?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.4 versus 21.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 60K.
How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 1B and MiMo-V2.6-Flash share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 1B has 22 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Flash has 19.