Model comparison

MiMo-V2.6-Flash vs Qwen3.7 Max

Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 48.5 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2.6-Flash costs 21× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 16 shared benchmarks.

MiMo-V2.6-Flash Xiaomi

48.5

Rank #55 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Max

Alibaba (Qwen)

51.5

Rank #42 Confirmed

Summary

They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3.7 Max in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.7 Max leads 61.6 to 42.2.
The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 63% for MiMo-V2.6-Flash and 26% for Qwen3.7 Max.
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $7.50 for Qwen3.7 Max.
MiMo-V2.6-Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
MiMo-V2.6-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

MiMo-V2.6-Flash and Qwen3.7 Max specifications
	MiMo-V2.6-Flash	Qwen3.7 Max
Provider	Xiaomi	Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index	48.5	51.5
Released	2026-09-21	2026-05-19
Weights	Open	Proprietary
Context window	1.05M	1M
Max output	131K	131K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.14	$2.50
Output $ / M tokens	$0.28	$7.50
Results tracked	19	33

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), Qwen3.7 Max: 50.4 (#45)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	MiMo-V2.6-Flash	Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena WebDev	1637	1515
SciCode	51.3%	48.8%
LMArena Coding	1504	1498
SWE-bench Verified	—	77.3%
ALE-Bench	—	1,189

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

MiMo-V2.6-Flash: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 22.1 (#135)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	MiMo-V2.6-Flash	Qwen3.7 Max
GBAEval	—	0.4%

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Max leads

MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 36.5 (#66), Qwen3.7 Max: 49.2 (#38)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	MiMo-V2.6-Flash	Qwen3.7 Max
CritPt	12%	13.4%
LMArena Hard Prompts	1482	1483
SimpleBench	—	70.4%
NYT Connections (extended)	—	85.1%
Chess Puzzles	—	19%
EBR-Bench	—	9.5%
Mystery Game Puzzles	—	32%
DTBench	—	92.3%
LMCA	—	44%
Epoch Capabilities Index	—	153.68

Math Qwen3.7 Max leads

MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 51.9 (#52), Qwen3.7 Max: 62.4 (#32)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	MiMo-V2.6-Flash	Qwen3.7 Max
ProofBench	63%	26%
LMArena Math	1468	1490
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)	—	64.6%
FrontierMath Tier 4	—	34.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	—	95.6%

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Max leads

MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 42.2 (#99), Qwen3.7 Max: 61.6 (#28)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	MiMo-V2.6-Flash	Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Expert	1501	1488
GPQA Diamond	—	90.9%
SimpleQA Verified	—	55.8%

Multimodal Not comparable

MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 40.5 (#47), Qwen3.7 Max: —

Multimodal benchmarks
Benchmark	MiMo-V2.6-Flash	Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Vision	1259	—

Multilingual Qwen3.7 Max leads

MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 54.0 (#51), Qwen3.7 Max: 56.9 (#15)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	MiMo-V2.6-Flash	Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Non-English	1434	1474
LMArena Chinese	1511	1530
LMArena Russian	1409	1484
LMArena French	1475	—
LMArena Spanish	1456	—

Instruction Following Too close to call

MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 76.8 (#35), Qwen3.7 Max: 76.7 (#38)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	MiMo-V2.6-Flash	Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Instruction Following	1463	1460

Long Context Too close to call

MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 44.8 (#57), Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#40)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	MiMo-V2.6-Flash	Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Longer Query	1463	1482

Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Max leads

MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 63.1 (#67), Qwen3.7 Max: 65.0 (#54)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	MiMo-V2.6-Flash	Qwen3.7 Max
LMArena Text	1455	1476
LMArena Creative Writing	1400	1449
LMArena Multi-Turn	1451	1481
EQ-Bench 4	—	1110

Frequently asked questions

Is MiMo-V2.6-Flash better than Qwen3.7 Max?

Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.6-Flash or Qwen3.7 Max?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Max lists at $2.50 and $7.50.

Is MiMo-V2.6-Flash or Qwen3.7 Max better for coding?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.4 versus 50.4 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.6-Flash and Qwen3.7 Max share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.6-Flash has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Max has 33.