# MiMo-V2.6-Pro vs Qwen3-30B-A3B

> MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 38.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3-30B-A3B costs 2.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2.6-Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mimo-v2-6-pro-vs-qwen3-30b-a3b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 14

## Summary

- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher in 9 categories and Qwen3-30B-A3B in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads 43.1 to 22.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 60.9% for MiMo-V2.6-Pro and 33.3% for Qwen3-30B-A3B.
- Qwen3-30B-A3B is cheaper at $0.12 / $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 41K.

## Snapshot

| | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 50.3 | 38.9 |
| Rank | 49 | 179 |
| Context | 1.05M | 41K |
| Input $/M | $0.43 | $0.12 |
| Output $/M | $0.87 | $0.50 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 55.5 (#23)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 37.5 (#194)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 60.9% | 33.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1534 | 1416 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1629 | — |
| WeirdML | — | 29.8% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,158 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 37.5 (#35)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 29.8 (#82)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 59.5% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 41.4% |

## Reasoning

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.1 (#50)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 22.2 (#204)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 26.6% | 0.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1512 | 1398 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 54.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 8% |
| DTBench | — | 69.3% |
| LMCA | — | 22.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 139.63 |

## Math

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 54.5 (#45)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 37.4 (#157)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1494 | 1394 |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 47.8% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 70.3% |
| ProofBench | 70% | — |

## Knowledge

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.5 (#92)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 41.8 (#105)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1543 | 1396 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 70.1% |
| Confabulations | — | 12.3% |

## Multimodal

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 40.8 (#43)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1264 | — |

## Multilingual

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 56.9 (#14)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 49.5 (#132)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1474 | 1372 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1529 | 1433 |
| LMArena Russian | 1480 | 1370 |
| LMArena French | — | 1418 |
| LMArena German | — | 1380 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1337 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1331 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1404 |

## Instruction Following

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 78.2 (#12)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 72.0 (#142)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1493 | 1363 |

## Long Context

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 46.0 (#27)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 31.0 (#283)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1501 | 1379 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 40.6% |

## Writing & Preference

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 66.8 (#33)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 55.6 (#143)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1492 | 1384 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1468 | 1317 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1464 | 1378 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 75.3% |

## FAQ

### Is MiMo-V2.6-Pro better than Qwen3-30B-A3B?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 38.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3-30B-A3B costs 2.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2.6-Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.6-Pro or Qwen3-30B-A3B?

Qwen3-30B-A3B is cheaper. It lists at $0.12 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2.6-Pro lists at $0.43 and $0.87.

### Is MiMo-V2.6-Pro or Qwen3-30B-A3B better for coding?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 37.5 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 41K.

### How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.6-Pro and Qwen3-30B-A3B share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-30B-A3B has 32.