Model comparison
Mercury 2 vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 39.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Mercury 2 scores higher in 0 categories and MiMo-V2.6-Flash in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads 53.4 to 33.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 38.7% for Mercury 2 and 51.3% for MiMo-V2.6-Flash.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $0.25 / $0.75 for Mercury 2.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 128K.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Mercury 2 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 39.1 | 48.5 |
| Released | 2026-02-20 | 2026-09-21 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 128K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 50K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.25 | $0.14 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.75 | $0.28 |
| Results tracked | 17 | 19 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Mercury 2: 33.5 (#255), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 53.4 (#30)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1171 | 1637 |
| SciCode | 38.7% | 51.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1391 | 1504 |
| WeirdML | 43.2% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 785.58 | — |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Mercury 2: 23.8 (#170), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 36.5 (#66)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0.8% | 12% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1362 | 1482 |
Math Not comparable
Mercury 2: —, MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 51.9 (#52)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | — | 63% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1468 |
Knowledge MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Mercury 2: 36.2 (#172), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 42.2 (#99)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1358 | 1501 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12.3% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Mercury 2: —, MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 40.5 (#47)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1259 |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Mercury 2: 46.6 (#157), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 54.0 (#51)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1331 | 1434 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1417 | 1511 |
| LMArena Russian | 1304 | 1409 |
| LMArena French | — | 1475 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1456 |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Mercury 2: 70.2 (#165), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 76.8 (#35)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1329 | 1463 |
Long Context MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Mercury 2: 40.5 (#154), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 44.8 (#57)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1330 | 1463 |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
Mercury 2: 53.8 (#155), MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 63.1 (#67)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1355 | 1455 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1289 | 1400 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1358 | 1451 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Mercury 2 better than MiMo-V2.6-Flash?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 39.1 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Mercury 2 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; Mercury 2 lists at $0.25 and $0.75.
Is Mercury 2 or MiMo-V2.6-Flash better for coding?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.4 versus 33.5 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 Mercury 2 and MiMo-V2.6-Flash share?
14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mercury 2 has 17 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Flash has 19.