Model comparison

MiMo-V2.6-Pro vs Mistral Medium 3.1

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 31.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

MiMo-V2.6-Pro Xiaomi

50.3

Rank #49 Confirmed

Mistral Medium 3.1 Mistral AI

31.9

Rank #266 Reported

Summary

  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads 43.1 to 10.6.
  • MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $2 for Mistral Medium 3.1.
  • MiMo-V2.6-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
  • MiMo-V2.6-Pro has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

MiMo-V2.6-Pro and Mistral Medium 3.1 specifications
MiMo-V2.6-ProMistral Medium 3.1
ProviderXiaomiMistral AI
Noometry Index50.331.9
Released2026-09-21—
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1.05M131K
Max output131K105K
Input $ / M tokens$0.43$0.40
Output $ / M tokens$0.87$2
Results tracked193

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 55.5 (#23), Mistral Medium 3.1: —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-ProMistral Medium 3.1
LMArena WebDev1629—
SciCode60.9%—
LMArena Coding1534—
ALE-Bench1,158—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 37.5 (#35), Mistral Medium 3.1: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-ProMistral Medium 3.1
APEX-Agents59.5%—

Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.1 (#50), Mistral Medium 3.1: 10.6 (#341)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-ProMistral Medium 3.1
NYT Connections (extended)—6.5%
CritPt26.6%—
Thematic Generalization—20.3%
LMArena Hard Prompts1512—

Math Not comparable

MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 54.5 (#45), Mistral Medium 3.1: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-ProMistral Medium 3.1
ProofBench70%—
LMArena Math1494—

Knowledge Not comparable

MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.5 (#92), Mistral Medium 3.1: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-ProMistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Expert1543—

Multimodal Not comparable

MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 40.8 (#43), Mistral Medium 3.1: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-ProMistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Vision1264—

Multilingual Not comparable

MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 56.9 (#14), Mistral Medium 3.1: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-ProMistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Non-English1474—
LMArena Chinese1529—
LMArena Russian1480—

Instruction Following Not comparable

MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 78.2 (#12), Mistral Medium 3.1: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-ProMistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Instruction Following1493—

Long Context Not comparable

MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 46.0 (#27), Mistral Medium 3.1: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-ProMistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Longer Query1501—

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 66.8 (#33), Mistral Medium 3.1: 55.5 (#145)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-ProMistral Medium 3.1
LMArena Text1492—
LMArena Creative Writing1468—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1476
LMArena Multi-Turn1464—

Frequently asked questions

Is MiMo-V2.6-Pro better than Mistral Medium 3.1?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 31.9 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.6-Pro or Mistral Medium 3.1?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.43 per million input tokens and $0.87 per million output tokens; Mistral Medium 3.1 lists at $0.40 and $2.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.6-Pro and Mistral Medium 3.1 share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 19 scored results on Noometry and Mistral Medium 3.1 has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper