Model comparison
MiMo-V2.6-Pro vs Qwen3.5-9B
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 33.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5-9B costs 4.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2.6-Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen3.5-9B in 1 category; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads 37.5 to 14.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 60.9% for MiMo-V2.6-Pro and 27.5% for Qwen3.5-9B.
- Qwen3.5-9B is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.15 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 262K.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.5-9B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 50.3 | 33.8 |
| Released | 2026-09-21 | 2026-02-23 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 262K |
| Max output | 131K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.43 | $0.10 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.87 | $0.15 |
| Results tracked | 19 | 10 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 55.5 (#23), Qwen3.5-9B: 35.9 (#217)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 60.9% | 27.5% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1629 | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1534 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,158 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 37.5 (#35), Qwen3.5-9B: 14.5 (#151)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 9.2% |
| APEX-Agents | 59.5% | — |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.1 (#50), Qwen3.5-9B: 23.1 (#182)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 26.6% | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 12% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1512 | — |
| DTBench | — | 71.2% |
| LMCA | — | 24.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 139.46 |
Math MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 54.5 (#45), Qwen3.5-9B: 34.8 (#192)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 48.5% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 61.7% |
| ProofBench | 70% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1494 | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.5-9B leads
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.5 (#92), Qwen3.5-9B: 46.0 (#84)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 79% |
| LMArena Expert | 1543 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 40.8 (#43), Qwen3.5-9B: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1264 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 56.9 (#14), Qwen3.5-9B: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1474 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1529 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1480 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 78.2 (#12), Qwen3.5-9B: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1493 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 46.0 (#27), Qwen3.5-9B: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1501 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 66.8 (#33), Qwen3.5-9B: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1492 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1468 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1464 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2.6-Pro better than Qwen3.5-9B?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 33.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5-9B costs 4.8× 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 Qwen3.5-9B?
Qwen3.5-9B is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2.6-Pro lists at $0.43 and $0.87.
Is MiMo-V2.6-Pro or Qwen3.5-9B better for coding?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 35.9 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.6-Pro and Qwen3.5-9B share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-9B has 10.