# GLM-5.3-Flash vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro

> GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 50.3 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-5-3-flash-vs-mimo-v2-6-pro
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 19

## Summary

- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.3-Flash scores higher in 3 categories and MiMo-V2.6-Pro in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.3-Flash leads 58.4 to 43.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 21% for GLM-5.3-Flash and 70% for MiMo-V2.6-Pro.
- GLM-5.3-Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.50 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.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-5.3-Flash | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 51.8 | 50.3 |
| Rank | 41 | 49 |
| Context | 1M | 1.05M |
| Input $/M | $0.15 | $0.43 |
| Output $/M | $0.50 | $0.87 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.1 (#31)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 55.5 (#23)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1609 | 1629 |
| SciCode | 51.6% | 60.9% |
| LMArena Coding | 1508 | 1534 |
| ALE-Bench | 303.55 | 1,158 |
| DeepSWE | 63.4% | — |
| FrontierCode | 31.8% | — |
| CursorBench | 36.8% | — |
| FrontierSWE | 18.1% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 34.2 (#47)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 37.5 (#35)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 52.8% | 59.5% |
| GDP.pdf | 14% | — |

## Reasoning

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 48.0 (#42)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.1 (#50)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 15.4% | 26.6% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1491 | 1512 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 65.8% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 91% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 14% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 8% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 52.5% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.15 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 151.88 | — |

## Math

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 53.3 (#47)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 54.5 (#45)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 21% | 70% |
| LMArena Math | 1500 | 1494 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 55.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 17.1% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 93.9% | — |

## Knowledge

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 58.4 (#36)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.5 (#92)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1513 | 1543 |
| GPQA Diamond | 90.2% | — |

## Multimodal

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 42.8 (#27)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 40.8 (#43)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1296 | 1264 |

## Multilingual

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 56.0 (#25)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 56.9 (#14)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1462 | 1474 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1527 | 1529 |
| LMArena Russian | 1469 | 1480 |
| LMArena French | 1496 | — |
| LMArena German | 1470 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1429 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1446 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1471 | — |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 77.5 (#20)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 78.2 (#12)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1478 | 1493 |

## Long Context

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 45.4 (#39)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 46.0 (#27)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1482 | 1501 |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-5.3-Flash: 65.3 (#50)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 66.8 (#33)

| Benchmark | GLM-5.3-Flash | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1471 | 1492 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1442 | 1468 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1467 | 1464 |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-5.3-Flash better than MiMo-V2.6-Pro?

GLM-5.3-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.8 to 50.3 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, GLM-5.3-Flash or MiMo-V2.6-Pro?

GLM-5.3-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2.6-Pro lists at $0.43 and $0.87.

### Is GLM-5.3-Flash or MiMo-V2.6-Pro better for coding?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 53.1 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 GLM-5.3-Flash and MiMo-V2.6-Pro share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.3-Flash has 40 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 19.