Model comparison
MiMo-V2-Omni vs Qwen3.6 Max Preview
Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 42.9 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2-Omni costs 17× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Max Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2-Omni scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Max Preview in 8 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads 57.6 to 39.9.
- MiMo-V2-Omni is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $1.30 / $7.80 for Qwen3.6 Max Preview.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen3.6 Max Preview | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 42.9 | 51.1 |
| Released | 2026-03-18 | 2026-04-20 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 262K | 262K |
| Max output | 131K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.14 | $1.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.28 | $7.80 |
| Results tracked | 18 | 29 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
MiMo-V2-Omni: 42.7 (#87), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 48.6 (#50)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1467 | 1472 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 76.7% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1482 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
MiMo-V2-Omni: —, Qwen3.6 Max Preview: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 4,254 |
Reasoning Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
MiMo-V2-Omni: 28.6 (#86), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 40.8 (#47)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1445 | 1457 |
| SimpleBench | — | 63% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 74.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 20% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 19% |
| DTBench | — | 87.2% |
| LMCA | — | 42.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 149.27 |
Math Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
MiMo-V2-Omni: 36.4 (#112), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 52.2 (#40)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1432 | 1465 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 91.1% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 23.1% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 4.2% |
Knowledge Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
MiMo-V2-Omni: 39.9 (#114), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 57.6 (#35)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1449 | 1476 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 87.4% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 52% |
Multimodal Not comparable
MiMo-V2-Omni: 37.9 (#62), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1228 | — |
Multilingual Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
MiMo-V2-Omni: 52.0 (#97), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 54.3 (#46)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1404 | 1436 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1469 | 1487 |
| LMArena French | 1448 | 1449 |
| LMArena Russian | 1412 | 1444 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1432 | 1452 |
| LMArena German | 1398 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1318 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1355 | — |
Instruction Following Too close to call
MiMo-V2-Omni: 75.4 (#62), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 75.8 (#51)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1428 | 1437 |
Long Context Too close to call
MiMo-V2-Omni: 44.1 (#72), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 44.6 (#59)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1442 | 1457 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.6 Max Preview leads
MiMo-V2-Omni: 61.6 (#83), Qwen3.6 Max Preview: 64.0 (#58)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen3.6 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1424 | 1447 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1393 | 1435 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1446 | 1456 |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2-Omni better than Qwen3.6 Max Preview?
Qwen3.6 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.1 to 42.9 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2-Omni costs 17× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Max Preview's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2-Omni or Qwen3.6 Max Preview?
MiMo-V2-Omni is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Max Preview lists at $1.30 and $7.80.
Is MiMo-V2-Omni or Qwen3.6 Max Preview better for coding?
Qwen3.6 Max Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.6 versus 42.7 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both accept 262K tokens.
How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Omni and Qwen3.6 Max Preview share?
14 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Omni has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Max Preview has 29.