Noometry

Model comparison

MiMo-V2.6-Pro vs Qwen3 Max

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 43.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

MiMo-V2.6-Pro Xiaomi

50.3

Rank #49 Confirmed

Qwen3 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

43.7

Rank #87 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen3 Max in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads 43.1 to 22.6.
  • MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $1.20 / $6 for Qwen3 Max.
  • MiMo-V2.6-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 262K.
  • MiMo-V2.6-Pro has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

MiMo-V2.6-ProQwen3 Max
ProviderXiaomiAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index50.343.7
Released2026-09-212025-09-23
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1.05M262K
Max output131K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.43$1.20
Output $ / M tokens$0.87$6
Results tracked1933

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 Max: 43.0 (#93)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-ProQwen3 Max
LMArena Coding15341456
ALE-Bench1,158370.45
LMArena WebDev1629—
SciCode60.9%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 37.5 (#35), Qwen3 Max: —

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-ProQwen3 Max
APEX-Agents59.5%—
Vending-Bench 2—71.56

Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.1 (#50), Qwen3 Max: 22.6 (#190)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-ProQwen3 Max
LMArena Hard Prompts15121448
Kagi LLM Benchmark—72.5%
NYT Connections (extended)—30.1%
CritPt26.6%—
Chess Puzzles—4%
Mystery Game Puzzles—5%
DTBench—82.1%
LMCA—28.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index—142.38

Math MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 54.5 (#45), Qwen3 Max: 38.7 (#131)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-ProQwen3 Max
LMArena Math14941446
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—18.9%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—73.3%
ProofBench70%—
MATH Level 5—97.1%

Knowledge Qwen3 Max leads

MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.5 (#92), Qwen3 Max: 48.1 (#78)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-ProQwen3 Max
LMArena Expert15431455
GPQA Diamond—72.6%
SimpleQA Verified—48.7%

Multimodal Not comparable

MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 40.8 (#43), Qwen3 Max: —

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-ProQwen3 Max
LMArena Vision1264—

Multilingual MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 56.9 (#14), Qwen3 Max: 53.7 (#62)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-ProQwen3 Max
LMArena Non-English14741429
LMArena Chinese15291478
LMArena Russian14801428
LMArena French—1449
LMArena German—1463
LMArena Japanese—1397
LMArena Korean—1399
LMArena Spanish—1462

Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 78.2 (#12), Qwen3 Max: 74.8 (#87)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-ProQwen3 Max
LMArena Instruction Following14931419

Long Context MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 46.0 (#27), Qwen3 Max: 41.6 (#134)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-ProQwen3 Max
LMArena Longer Query15011438
Fiction.LiveBench—66.7%
CL-bench—14.5%

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 66.8 (#33), Qwen3 Max: 62.4 (#76)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.6-ProQwen3 Max
LMArena Text14921439
LMArena Creative Writing14681402
LMArena Multi-Turn14641446

Frequently asked questions

Is MiMo-V2.6-Pro better than Qwen3 Max?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 43.7 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.6-Pro or Qwen3 Max?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.43 per million input tokens and $0.87 per million output tokens; Qwen3 Max lists at $1.20 and $6.

Is MiMo-V2.6-Pro or Qwen3 Max better for coding?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 43.0 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 Max share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 Max has 33.

Related comparisons

Go deeper