Noometry

Model comparison

MiMo-V2.6-Flash vs Qwen3 Max

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 43.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

MiMo-V2.6-Flash Xiaomi

48.5

Rank #55 Confirmed

Qwen3 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

43.7

Rank #87 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen3 Max in 1 category; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads 36.5 to 22.6.
  • MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $1.20 / $6 for Qwen3 Max.
  • MiMo-V2.6-Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 262K.
  • MiMo-V2.6-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

MiMo-V2.6-FlashQwen3 Max
ProviderXiaomiAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index48.543.7
Released2026-09-212025-09-23
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1.05M262K
Max output131K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.14$1.20
Output $ / M tokens$0.28$6
Results tracked1933

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 Max: 43.0 (#93)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-FlashQwen3 Max
LMArena Coding15041456
LMArena WebDev1637—
SciCode51.3%—
ALE-Bench—370.45

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

MiMo-V2.6-Flash: —, Qwen3 Max: —

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-FlashQwen3 Max
Vending-Bench 2—71.56

Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads

MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 36.5 (#66), Qwen3 Max: 22.6 (#190)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-FlashQwen3 Max
LMArena Hard Prompts14821448
Kagi LLM Benchmark—72.5%
NYT Connections (extended)—30.1%
CritPt12%—
Chess Puzzles—4%
Mystery Game Puzzles—5%
DTBench—82.1%
LMCA—28.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index—142.38

Math MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads

MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 51.9 (#52), Qwen3 Max: 38.7 (#131)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-FlashQwen3 Max
LMArena Math14681446
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—18.9%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—73.3%
ProofBench63%—
MATH Level 5—97.1%

Knowledge Qwen3 Max leads

MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 42.2 (#99), Qwen3 Max: 48.1 (#78)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-FlashQwen3 Max
LMArena Expert15011455
GPQA Diamond—72.6%
SimpleQA Verified—48.7%

Multimodal Not comparable

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

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-FlashQwen3 Max
LMArena Vision1259—

Multilingual Too close to call

MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 54.0 (#51), Qwen3 Max: 53.7 (#62)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-FlashQwen3 Max
LMArena Non-English14341429
LMArena Chinese15111478
LMArena French14751449
LMArena Russian14091428
LMArena Spanish14561462
LMArena German—1463
LMArena Japanese—1397
LMArena Korean—1399

Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads

MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 76.8 (#35), Qwen3 Max: 74.8 (#87)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-FlashQwen3 Max
LMArena Instruction Following14631419

Long Context MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads

MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 44.8 (#57), Qwen3 Max: 41.6 (#134)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-FlashQwen3 Max
LMArena Longer Query14631438
Fiction.LiveBench—66.7%
CL-bench—14.5%

Writing & Preference Too close to call

MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 63.1 (#67), Qwen3 Max: 62.4 (#76)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-FlashQwen3 Max
LMArena Text14551439
LMArena Creative Writing14001402
LMArena Multi-Turn14511446

Frequently asked questions

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

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 43.7 on the Noometry Index.

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

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; Qwen3 Max lists at $1.20 and $6.

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

MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.4 versus 43.0 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.

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

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

Related comparisons

Go deeper