Model comparison
MiMo-V2.6-Pro vs Qwen3.6 Plus
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 47.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen3.6 Plus in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads 55.5 to 40.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is CritPt: 26.6% for MiMo-V2.6-Pro and 2.9% for Qwen3.6 Plus.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $0.50 / $3 for Qwen3.6 Plus.
- 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 | Qwen3.6 Plus | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 50.3 | 47.5 |
| Released | 2026-09-21 | 2026-03-31 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Max output | 131K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.43 | $0.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.87 | $3 |
| Results tracked | 19 | 37 |
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), Qwen3.6 Plus: 40.8 (#130)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1629 | 1461 |
| SciCode | 60.9% | 40.7% |
| LMArena Coding | 1534 | 1467 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,158 | 670.15 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 57.9% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 37.5 (#35), Qwen3.6 Plus: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 59.5% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 5,115 |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.1 (#50), Qwen3.6 Plus: 29.3 (#93)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 26.6% | 2.9% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1512 | 1449 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 60.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 17% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 59.5% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 12% |
| DTBench | — | 81.9% |
| LMCA | — | 33.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 147.65 |
Math MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 54.5 (#45), Qwen3.6 Plus: 51.8 (#54)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1494 | 1450 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 38.2% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 93.3% |
| ProofBench | 70% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 26.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 8.3% |
Knowledge Qwen3.6 Plus leads
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.5 (#92), Qwen3.6 Plus: 56.1 (#45)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1543 | 1454 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 88.4% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 44.1% |
Multimodal Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 40.8 (#43), Qwen3.6 Plus: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1264 | — |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 56.9 (#14), Qwen3.6 Plus: 53.3 (#70)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1474 | 1424 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1529 | 1477 |
| LMArena Russian | 1480 | 1434 |
| LMArena French | — | 1455 |
| LMArena German | — | 1452 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1389 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1379 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1432 |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 78.2 (#12), Qwen3.6 Plus: 75.0 (#74)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1493 | 1425 |
Long Context Too close to call
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 46.0 (#27), Qwen3.6 Plus: 45.2 (#49)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1501 | 1439 |
| CL-bench | — | 20.3% |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 66.8 (#33), Qwen3.6 Plus: 62.2 (#82)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1492 | 1437 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1468 | 1404 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1464 | 1438 |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2.6-Pro better than Qwen3.6 Plus?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 47.5 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.6-Pro or Qwen3.6 Plus?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.43 per million input tokens and $0.87 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Plus lists at $0.50 and $3.
Is MiMo-V2.6-Pro or Qwen3.6 Plus better for coding?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 40.8 in the Noometry coding category.
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 Qwen3.6 Plus share?
16 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Plus has 37.