Model comparison
MiMo-V2.6-Pro vs Qwen3.7 Flash
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 39.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.7 Flash costs 9.9× 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 54.5 to 38.3.
- Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper at $0.03 / $0.13 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 | Qwen3.7 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 50.3 | 39.9 |
| Released | 2026-09-21 | 2026-07-15 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Max output | 131K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.43 | $0.03 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.87 | $0.13 |
| Results tracked | 19 | 7 |
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), Qwen3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1629 | — |
| SciCode | 60.9% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1534 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,158 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 37.5 (#35), Qwen3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 59.5% | — |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.1 (#50), Qwen3.7 Flash: 28.2 (#108)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 43.8% |
| CritPt | 26.6% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 23% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1512 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 15% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 144.64 |
Math MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 54.5 (#45), Qwen3.7 Flash: 38.3 (#140)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 19.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 86.7% |
| ProofBench | 70% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1494 | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.7 Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.5 (#92), Qwen3.7 Flash: 48.9 (#75)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 82.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1543 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 40.8 (#43), Qwen3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1264 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 56.9 (#14), Qwen3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1474 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1529 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1480 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 78.2 (#12), Qwen3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1493 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 46.0 (#27), Qwen3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1501 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 66.8 (#33), Qwen3.7 Flash: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1492 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1468 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1464 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2.6-Pro better than Qwen3.7 Flash?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 39.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.7 Flash costs 9.9× 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 Qwen3.7 Flash?
Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.03 per million input tokens and $0.13 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 Qwen3.7 Flash share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Flash has 7.