# MiMo-V2.6-Flash vs Qwen3.6 Plus

> MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 47.5 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mimo-v2-6-flash-vs-qwen3-6-plus
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 17

## Summary

- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen3.6 Plus in 2 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 Plus leads 56.1 to 42.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 51.3% for MiMo-V2.6-Flash and 40.7% for Qwen3.6 Plus.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $0.50 / $3 for Qwen3.6 Plus.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 48.5 | 47.5 |
| Rank | 55 | 62 |
| Context | 1.05M | 1M |
| Input $/M | $0.14 | $0.50 |
| Output $/M | $0.28 | $3 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 53.4 (#30)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: 40.8 (#130)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1637 | 1461 |
| SciCode | 51.3% | 40.7% |
| LMArena Coding | 1504 | 1467 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 57.9% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 670.15 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- MiMo-V2.6-Flash: —
- Qwen3.6 Plus: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 5,115 |

## Reasoning

- MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 36.5 (#66)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: 29.3 (#93)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 12% | 2.9% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1482 | 1449 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 60.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 17% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 59.5% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 12% |
| DTBench | — | 81.9% |
| LMCA | — | 33.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 147.65 |

## Math

- MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 51.9 (#52)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: 51.8 (#54)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1468 | 1450 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 38.2% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 93.3% |
| ProofBench | 63% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 26.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 8.3% |

## Knowledge

- MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 42.2 (#99)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: 56.1 (#45)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1501 | 1454 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 88.4% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 44.1% |

## Multimodal

- MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 40.5 (#47)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1259 | — |

## Multilingual

- MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 54.0 (#51)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: 53.3 (#70)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1434 | 1424 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1511 | 1477 |
| LMArena French | 1475 | 1455 |
| LMArena Russian | 1409 | 1434 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1456 | 1432 |
| LMArena German | — | 1452 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1389 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1379 |

## Instruction Following

- MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 76.8 (#35)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: 75.0 (#74)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1463 | 1425 |

## Long Context

- MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 44.8 (#57)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: 45.2 (#49)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1463 | 1439 |
| CL-bench | — | 20.3% |

## Writing & Preference

- MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 63.1 (#67)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: 62.2 (#82)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1455 | 1437 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1400 | 1404 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1451 | 1438 |

## FAQ

### Is MiMo-V2.6-Flash better than Qwen3.6 Plus?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 47.5 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.6-Flash or Qwen3.6 Plus?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Plus lists at $0.50 and $3.

### Is MiMo-V2.6-Flash or Qwen3.6 Plus better for coding?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.4 versus 40.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

### How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.6-Flash and Qwen3.6 Plus share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.6-Flash has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Plus has 37.