Model comparison
MiMo-V2.6-Flash vs Qwen2.5-Max
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 40.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads 51.9 to 36.9.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen2.5-Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 48.5 | 40.7 |
| Released | 2026-09-21 | 2025-01-25 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | — |
| Max output | 131K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.14 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.28 | — |
| Results tracked | 19 | 27 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 53.4 (#30), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.8 (#117)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1504 | 1359 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1637 | — |
| SciCode | 51.3% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 64.4% |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 36.5 (#66), Qwen2.5-Max: 25.6 (#147)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1482 | 1360 |
| CritPt | 12% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 51.4% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 67.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 132.53 |
| LiveBench | — | 62.3% |
Math MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 51.9 (#52), Qwen2.5-Max: 36.9 (#162)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1468 | 1369 |
| ProofBench | 63% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 58.4% |
Knowledge MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 42.2 (#99), Qwen2.5-Max: 35.3 (#186)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1501 | 1337 |
| Confabulations | — | 21.8% |
Multimodal Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 40.5 (#47), Qwen2.5-Max: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1259 | — |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 54.0 (#51), Qwen2.5-Max: 48.1 (#146)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1434 | 1352 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1511 | 1382 |
| LMArena French | 1475 | 1396 |
| LMArena Russian | 1409 | 1353 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1456 | 1377 |
| LMArena German | — | 1350 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1300 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1304 |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 76.8 (#35), Qwen2.5-Max: 71.3 (#152)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1463 | 1335 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 75.3% |
Long Context MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 44.8 (#57), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.4 (#142)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1463 | 1358 |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 63.1 (#67), Qwen2.5-Max: 55.4 (#146)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1455 | 1367 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1400 | 1339 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1451 | 1364 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 72.9% |
| LiveBench Language | — | 56.3% |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2.6-Flash better than Qwen2.5-Max?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 40.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is MiMo-V2.6-Flash or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.4 versus 41.8 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.6-Flash and Qwen2.5-Max share?
14 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.6-Flash has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.