Model comparison
MiMo-V2-Pro vs Qwen3.6 27B
MiMo-V2-Pro and Qwen3.6 27B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (43.0 vs 42.2), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2-Pro leads 62.8 to 50.3.
- MiMo-V2-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $3.60 for Qwen3.6 27B.
- MiMo-V2-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 262K.
- Qwen3.6 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.6 27B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 43.0 | 42.2 |
| Released | 2026-03-18 | 2026-04-22 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 262K |
| Max output | 131K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.43 | $0.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.87 | $3.60 |
| Results tracked | 23 | 11 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2-Pro leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 43.8 (#83), Qwen3.6 27B: 39.1 (#163)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1433 | — |
| SciCode | — | 37.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1476 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 785.17 | — |
Reasoning Qwen3.6 27B leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 22.1 (#206), Qwen3.6 27B: 25.0 (#153)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 25.8% | — |
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 22% |
| Thematic Generalization | 45.9% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1457 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 7% |
| DTBench | — | 78.1% |
| LMCA | — | 34.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 146.5 |
Math Qwen3.6 27B leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 39.5 (#102), Qwen3.6 27B: 48.5 (#62)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 35.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 91.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1447 | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.6 27B leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.4 (#111), Qwen3.6 27B: 52.4 (#63)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 85.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1478 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
MiMo-V2-Pro: 52.7 (#81), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1416 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1456 | — |
| LMArena French | 1469 | — |
| LMArena German | 1417 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1366 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1400 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1427 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1457 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
MiMo-V2-Pro: 76.0 (#49), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1445 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.5 (#138), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| CL-bench | 15.7% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 6.9% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1455 | — |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2-Pro leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 62.8 (#70), Qwen3.6 27B: 50.3 (#181)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1436 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1415 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1026 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1456 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2-Pro better than Qwen3.6 27B?
MiMo-V2-Pro and Qwen3.6 27B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (43.0 vs 42.2), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2-Pro or Qwen3.6 27B?
MiMo-V2-Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.43 per million input tokens and $0.87 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 27B lists at $0.60 and $3.60.
Is MiMo-V2-Pro or Qwen3.6 27B better for coding?
MiMo-V2-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.8 versus 39.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Pro and Qwen3.6 27B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Pro has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 27B has 11.