Model comparison
MiMo-V2.6-Flash vs Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.4 to 42.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct in 1 category; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads 44.8 to 37.0.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $0.50 / $2 for Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 44.4 | 42.5 |
| Released | 2026-09-22 | 2025-09 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 131K |
| Max output | 131K | 33K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.14 | $0.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.28 | $2 |
| Results tracked | 13 | 25 |
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: 44.3 (#68), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 41.9 (#101)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1516 | 1441 |
Reasoning Too close to call
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 29.6 (#82), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 30.1 (#79)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1481 | 1428 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 66.7% |
Math MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 37.4 (#97), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 36.3 (#118)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1477 | 1440 |
| Omni-MATH | — | 46.7% |
Knowledge Too close to call
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 42.0 (#91), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 41.3 (#102)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1516 | 1416 |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 78.6% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 9.3% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 63% |
Multimodal Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 40.2 (#39), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1266 | — |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 54.6 (#41), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 52.3 (#88)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1439 | 1407 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1501 | 1461 |
| LMArena Russian | 1424 | 1403 |
| LMArena French | — | 1415 |
| LMArena German | — | 1416 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1398 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1366 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1436 |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 77.0 (#33), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 71.0 (#154)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1463 | 1388 |
| IFEval | — | 81% |
Long Context MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 44.8 (#52), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 37.0 (#218)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1465 | 1403 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 55.6% |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 63.9 (#61), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 58.2 (#116)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1459 | 1417 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1408 | 1333 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1460 | 1415 |
| WildBench | — | 80.7% |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2.6-Flash better than Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.4 to 42.5 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.6-Flash or Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct lists at $0.50 and $2.
Is MiMo-V2.6-Flash or Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct better for coding?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.3 versus 41.9 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.6-Flash and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.6-Flash has 13 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct has 25.