Model comparison
MiMo-V2.5 vs Ring-2.6-1T
MiMo-V2.5 has enough public results to be ranked (#93); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.
Ant Group (inclusionAI)Summary
- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.5 scores higher in 2 categories and Ring-2.6-1T in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where MiMo-V2.5 leads 43.9 to 40.7.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2.5 | Ring-2.6-1T | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Ant Group (inclusionAI) |
| Noometry Index | 43.4 | 36.9 |
| Released | 2026-04-22 | 2026-05-14 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | — |
| Max output | 131K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.14 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.28 | — |
| Results tracked | 23 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2.5 leads
MiMo-V2.5: 43.9 (#81), Ring-2.6-1T: 40.7
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 43.1% | 42.4% |
| ALE-Bench | 513.95 | 432.57 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1438 | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1469 | — |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.5 leads
MiMo-V2.5: 28.6 (#101), Ring-2.6-1T: 26.1
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 3.7% | 3.7% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1450 | — |
Math Not comparable
MiMo-V2.5: 36.8 (#163), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 16% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1436 | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
MiMo-V2.5: 40.8 (#115), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1460 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
MiMo-V2.5: 39.8 (#54), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1247 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
MiMo-V2.5: 51.9 (#99), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1404 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1468 | — |
| LMArena French | 1447 | — |
| LMArena German | 1421 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1306 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1363 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1395 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1416 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
MiMo-V2.5: 75.5 (#60), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1434 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
MiMo-V2.5: 44.2 (#73), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1445 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
MiMo-V2.5: 61.6 (#86), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1428 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1393 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1445 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2.5 better than Ring-2.6-1T?
MiMo-V2.5 has enough public results to be ranked (#93); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Is MiMo-V2.5 or Ring-2.6-1T better for coding?
MiMo-V2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.9 versus 40.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.5 and Ring-2.6-1T share?
3 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.5 has 23 scored results on Noometry and Ring-2.6-1T has 3.