Model comparison
MiMo-V2.6-Pro vs Qwen Turbo
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.7 to 26.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 6.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2.6-Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads 37.9 to 14.5.
- Qwen Turbo is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.43 / $0.87 for MiMo-V2.6-Pro.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen Turbo | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 46.7 | 26.8 |
| Released | 2026-09-22 | 2024-11-01 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Max output | 131K | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.43 | $0.05 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.87 | $0.20 |
| Results tracked | 14 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 53.2 (#27), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1618 | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1538 | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 30.4 (#76), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1511 | — |
Math MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 37.9 (#91), Qwen Turbo: 14.5 (#291)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 6.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1497 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 56.2% |
Knowledge MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.0 (#85), Qwen Turbo: 22.2 (#267)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 41.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1548 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 40.2 (#40), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1265 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 57.0 (#15), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1474 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1532 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1481 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 78.2 (#10), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1490 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 46.0 (#26), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1500 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 66.9 (#32), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1491 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1465 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1463 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2.6-Pro better than Qwen Turbo?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.7 to 26.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 6.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2.6-Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.6-Pro or Qwen Turbo?
Qwen Turbo is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2.6-Pro lists at $0.43 and $0.87.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.6-Pro and Qwen Turbo share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Turbo has 3.