# MiMo-V2.6-Pro vs Qwen3.8 Max

> Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.0 to 46.7 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2.6-Pro costs 5.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.8 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mimo-v2-6-pro-vs-qwen3-8-max
- 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 5 categories and Qwen3.8 Max in 4 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.8 Max leads 73.1 to 37.9.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Qwen3.8 Max.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 46.7 | 56.0 |
| Rank | 55 | 21 |
| Context | 1.05M | 1M |
| Input $/M | $0.43 | $2 |
| Output $/M | $0.87 | $6 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 53.2 (#27)
- Qwen3.8 Max: 52.3 (#30)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1618 | 1671 |
| LMArena Coding | 1538 | 1499 |
| DeepSWE | — | 57.5% |
| FrontierSWE | — | 15.8% |
| SciCode | — | 52.9% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: —
- Qwen3.8 Max: 42.6 (#17)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 55.1% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 23.2% |

## Reasoning

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 30.4 (#76)
- Qwen3.8 Max: 53.4 (#26)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1511 | 1493 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 88.3% |
| CritPt | — | 20% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 40% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 38% |
| DTBench | — | 92% |
| LMCA | — | 46.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 156.69 |

## Math

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 37.9 (#91)
- Qwen3.8 Max: 73.1 (#15)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1497 | 1498 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 74.7% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 46.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 100% |
| ProofBench | — | 58% |

## Knowledge

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.0 (#85)
- Qwen3.8 Max: 61.7 (#25)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1548 | 1504 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 92.7% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 47.3% |

## Multimodal

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 40.2 (#40)
- Qwen3.8 Max: 36.9 (#70)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1265 | 1314 |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 20% |

## Multilingual

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 57.0 (#15)
- Qwen3.8 Max: 56.6 (#18)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1474 | 1468 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1532 | 1537 |
| LMArena Russian | 1481 | 1478 |
| LMArena French | — | 1502 |
| LMArena German | — | 1489 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1466 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1467 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1495 |

## Instruction Following

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 78.2 (#10)
- Qwen3.8 Max: 77.7 (#19)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1490 | 1478 |

## Long Context

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 46.0 (#26)
- Qwen3.8 Max: 45.5 (#30)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1500 | 1486 |

## Writing & Preference

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 66.9 (#32)
- Qwen3.8 Max: 67.0 (#31)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1491 | 1480 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1465 | 1478 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1463 | 1487 |

## FAQ

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

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.0 to 46.7 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2.6-Pro costs 5.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.8 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

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

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.43 per million input tokens and $0.87 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 Max lists at $2 and $6.

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

They score almost the same on coding (53.2 vs 52.3); test both on your own repository before choosing.

### Which has the bigger context window?

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

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

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 Max has 38.