# MiMo-V2.6-Pro vs Qwen3.8 27B

> MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 46.0 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mimo-v2-6-pro-vs-qwen3-8-27b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 18

## Summary

- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher in 9 categories and Qwen3.8 27B in 1 category; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads 54.5 to 37.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 70% for MiMo-V2.6-Pro and 16% for Qwen3.8 27B.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $0.99 / $1.49 for Qwen3.8 27B.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 262K.

## Snapshot

| | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 50.3 | 46.0 |
| Rank | 49 | 68 |
| Context | 1.05M | 262K |
| Input $/M | $0.43 | $0.99 |
| Output $/M | $0.87 | $1.49 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 55.5 (#23)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 50.5 (#44)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1629 | 1593 |
| SciCode | 60.9% | 46.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1534 | 1482 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,158 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 37.5 (#35)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 32.9 (#57)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 59.5% | 47.5% |

## Reasoning

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.1 (#50)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 41.0 (#54)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 26.6% | 5.4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1512 | 1460 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 42.4% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 54.5% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 87.5% |
| DTBench | — | 88% |
| LMCA | — | 41.4% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 45% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 149.38 |

## Math

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 54.5 (#45)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 37.1 (#161)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 70% | 16% |
| LMArena Math | 1494 | 1456 |

## Knowledge

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.5 (#92)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 41.6 (#109)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1543 | 1482 |

## Multimodal

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 40.8 (#43)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 41.3 (#37)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1264 | 1271 |

## Multilingual

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 56.9 (#14)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 53.7 (#60)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1474 | 1430 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1529 | 1504 |
| LMArena Russian | 1480 | 1415 |
| LMArena French | — | 1465 |
| LMArena German | — | 1438 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1384 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1393 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1448 |

## Instruction Following

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 78.2 (#12)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 75.8 (#53)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1493 | 1439 |

## Long Context

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 46.0 (#27)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 44.3 (#70)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1501 | 1450 |

## Writing & Preference

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 66.8 (#33)
- Qwen3.8 27B: 65.8 (#43)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.8 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1492 | 1441 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1468 | 1384 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1464 | 1441 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1671 |

## FAQ

### Is MiMo-V2.6-Pro better than Qwen3.8 27B?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 46.0 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.6-Pro or Qwen3.8 27B?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.43 per million input tokens and $0.87 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 27B lists at $0.99 and $1.49.

### Is MiMo-V2.6-Pro or Qwen3.8 27B better for coding?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 50.5 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.

### How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.6-Pro and Qwen3.8 27B share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 27B has 31.