Model comparison
Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 30.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct 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 math, where MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads 51.9 to 15.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 26% for Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct and 51.3% for MiMo-V2.6-Flash.
- Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.32 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 128K.
Side by side
| Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 30.6 | 48.5 |
| Released | 2024-12-06 | 2026-09-21 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 128K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 4K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | $0.14 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.32 | $0.28 |
| Results tracked | 43 | 19 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 31.0 (#290), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 53.4 (#30)
| Benchmark | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 26% | 51.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1268 | 1504 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1637 |
| WeirdML | 14.4% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 46.9% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 36.6% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 57.5% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 25.8 (#105), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: —
| Benchmark | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 31.9% | — |
| BALROG | 23% | — |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 14.1 (#327), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 36.5 (#66)
| Benchmark | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | 12% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1257 | 1482 |
| SimpleBench | 19.9% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 50.8% | — |
| DTBench | 59.5% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 49.5% | — |
| LMCA | 17.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 127.33 | — |
| ForecastBench | 58.6 | — |
| LiveBench | 50.2% | — |
Math MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 15.3 (#298), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 51.9 (#52)
| Benchmark | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1267 | 1468 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 5.1% | — |
| ProofBench | — | 63% |
| LiveBench Math | 42.2% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 41.6% | — |
Knowledge MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 30.6 (#226), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 42.2 (#99)
| Benchmark | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1225 | 1501 |
| GPQA Diamond | 47.4% | — |
| Confabulations | 22.8% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 4.1% | — |
| MMLU | 86.3% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: —, MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 40.5 (#47)
| Benchmark | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1259 |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 39.9 (#220), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 54.0 (#51)
| Benchmark | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1236 | 1434 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1217 | 1511 |
| LMArena French | 1281 | 1475 |
| LMArena Russian | 1252 | 1409 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1270 | 1456 |
| LMArena German | 1251 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1150 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1143 | — |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 71.1 (#157), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 76.8 (#35)
| Benchmark | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1242 | 1463 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 82.7% | — |
Long Context MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 26.4 (#295), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 44.8 (#57)
| Benchmark | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1256 | 1463 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 33.3% | — |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 47.6 (#207), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 63.1 (#67)
| Benchmark | Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1274 | 1455 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1250 | 1400 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1280 | 1451 |
| LiveBench Language | 39.2% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct better than MiMo-V2.6-Flash?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 30.6 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct or MiMo-V2.6-Flash?
Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.32 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2.6-Flash lists at $0.14 and $0.28.
Is Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct or MiMo-V2.6-Flash better for coding?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.4 versus 31.0 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct and MiMo-V2.6-Flash share?
16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct has 43 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Flash has 19.