Gemini 3.5 Flash vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro
Gemini 3.5 Flash 
MiMo-V2.6-Pro Verdict
- Gemini 3.5 Flash (medium) and MiMo-V2.6-Pro are level on quality (63.7 vs 64.3).
- Gemini 3.5 Flash (medium) is stronger in agents & tools, coding, human preference, instruction following, knowledge, maths, multimodal.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro is stronger in composite, long context, reasoning.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro is 6.2× cheaper ($0.548 vs $3.38 per 1M blended).
- Gemini 3.5 Flash (medium) streams 3.8× faster (202 vs 54 tokens per second).
| Metric | Gemini 3.5 Flash (medium) | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 63.7 | 64.3 |
| Agents & tools score | 67.9 | 55.1 |
| Coding score | 58.5 | – |
| Composite score | 69.5 | 84.8 |
| Human preference score | 67.5 | – |
| Instruction following score | 72.7 | – |
| Knowledge score | 72.5 | 66.8 |
| Long context score | 62.9 | 69.1 |
| Maths score | 67.2 | – |
| Multimodal score | 67.1 | – |
| Reasoning score | 62.9 | 88.8 |
| Blended price $/M | $3.38 | $0.548 |
| Output speed | 202 tok/s | 54 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 12.4 s | 39.8 s |
| Context window | 1.0M | 1.0M |
| LMArena Text | 1474 | – |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1493 | – |
| LMArena Coding | 1502 | – |
| LMArena WebDev | 1491 | – |
| LMArena Vision | 1307 | – |
| AA Intelligence Index | 33.6 | 46.3 |
| IFBench | 74.6% | – |
| AA-LCR | 74.3% | 86.3% |
| MMMU-Pro | 83.9% | – |
| AA-Omniscience | 20.8 | 8.4 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | 39.4% | – |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 92.1% | – |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 41.3% | 49.4% |
| SciCode (AA) | – | 60.9% |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | 95.6% | – |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals) | – | 67.8% |
| Vals Index | – | 59.7 |
| CritPt | 10.9% | 26.6% |
| GDPval (AA) | – | 58.7% |
| Code Migration | – | 43.0% |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark | – | 62.9% |
| Finance Agent v2 | – | 58.3% |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark | – | 10.8% |
| Legal Research Bench | – | 47.1% |
| Terminal-Bench Science | – | 2.9% |
| Vibe Code Bench v1.1 | – | 85.2% |
| LMArena Maths | 1478 | – |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1466 | – |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1463 | – |
| LMArena Multi-turn | 1476 | – |
| LMArena Longer Queries | 1478 | – |
| LMArena Document | 1461 | – |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 58.1% | – |
| DeepSWE | 37.4% | – |
| GDP.pdf | 14.0% | – |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA) | – | 34.9% |
| AutomationBench | – | 58.6% |
| GDP.pdf | – | 19.2% |
| AA-Omniscience: accuracy | 51.0% | 34.9% |
| AA-Omniscience: non-hallucination | 38.2% | 59.4% |
| AA-Briefcase | – | 1522 |
Data as of 2026-09-23. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Gemini 3.5 Flash vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro: questions
- Is Gemini 3.5 Flash better than MiMo-V2.6-Pro?
- Gemini 3.5 Flash (medium) and MiMo-V2.6-Pro are level on quality (63.7 vs 64.3). The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; MiMo-V2.6-Pro is ahead overall as of 2026-09-23, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Gemini 3.5 Flash better than MiMo-V2.6-Pro for agentic tasks?
- Gemini 3.5 Flash scores higher in agentic tasks (68 vs 55 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.5 Flash or MiMo-V2.6-Pro?
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper: $0.548 against $3.38 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Gemini 3.5 Flash or MiMo-V2.6-Pro?
- Gemini 3.5 Flash streams faster: 202 against 54 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Both accept 1.0M tokens of context.