BenchLeader
Menu
Best LLMsChoose a modelCoding plansLeaderboardsModelsBenchmarksProvidersReleases8

GPT-5.6 Sol vs Mimo v2 Omni

Full profiles: GPT-5.6 Sol (OpenAI) and Mimo v2 Omni (Xiaomi): every benchmark, price and rank.

Updated · Data from 10 sources

As of 29 Oct 2026, GPT-5.6 Sol is ahead of Mimo v2 Omni on quality (65.4 vs 58.9 on the BenchLeader Index). GPT-5.6 Sol leads in every category we measure both in.

Key facts (as of 29 Oct 2026)

  • GPT-5.6 Sol scores 65.4 on the BenchLeader Index and Mimo v2 Omni scores 58.9 (BenchLeader, 29 Oct 2026).
  • GPT-5.6 Sol costs $8.00 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 29 Oct 2026).
  • Of the 9 benchmarks both models have, GPT-5.6 Sol leads 8 (BenchLeader, 29 Oct 2026).
GPT-5.6 Sol benchmarks max OpenAI Mimo v2 Omni benchmarks XiaomiOpen in the comparison tool

Which to pick for…

The pick's numbers come first. Category scores on the BenchLeader scale (50 is the average model, 15 points one standard deviation). High confidence means a lead of half a standard deviation or more; under one point is called either.

Use casePickWhyConfidence
CodingGPT-5.6 Sol66 vs 62 category scoreMedium
Agents & tool useGPT-5.6 Sol67 vs 65 category score; Terminal-Bench Hard 65.9% vs 35.6%Medium
MathsGPT-5.6 Sol71 vs 61 category scoreHigh
ReasoningGPT-5.6 Sol65 vs 62 category score; GPQA Diamond (AA) 94.1% vs 85.5%Medium
Long documentsGPT-5.6 Sol67 vs 61 category score; AA-LCR v1.1 84.0% vs 73.3%Medium
Images and other mediaGPT-5.6 Sol66 vs 56 category score; MMMU-Pro 83.4% vs 73.9%High
Following instructionsGPT-5.6 Sol71 vs 67 category score; IFBench 72.7% vs 67.3%Medium
Chat quality (human preference)–Only Mimo v2 Omni has an Arena rating (61 category score)Not comparable
High volume on a budgetNeither flagshipA smaller model is usually the better fit: Cheapest good LLMs, Fastest LLMs–

Key differences

  • GPT-5.6 Sol (max) leads on quality: 65.4 vs 58.9.
  • GPT-5.6 Sol (max) is stronger in agents & tools, coding, instruction following, knowledge, long context, maths, multimodal, reasoning.
  • Mimo v2 Omni is stronger in human preference.

At a glance

SpecGPT-5.6 SolMimo v2 Omni
DeveloperOpenAIXiaomi
Released9 Jul 202627 Mar 2026
Context window (tokens)1,050,000256,000
Compared atGPT-5.6 Sol (max)Mimo v2 Omni
Open weightsNoNo
Price in / out / cached input per 1M$4.00 / $20.00 / $0.400–

Category by category

Category scores on the BenchLeader scale: 50 is the average evaluated model, 15 points is one standard deviation. A gap under one point is called level.

CategoryGPT-5.6 Sol (max)Mimo v2 OmniLeader
Reasoning65.161.9GPT-5.6 Sol
Coding65.862.1GPT-5.6 Sol
Agents & tools66.664.8GPT-5.6 Sol
Maths70.861.0GPT-5.6 Sol
Knowledge63.9–not comparable
Instruction following71.166.5GPT-5.6 Sol
Human preference–61.1not comparable
Multimodal66.255.9GPT-5.6 Sol
Long context66.961.4GPT-5.6 Sol

Where sources disagree

Across the 9 benchmarks both have, GPT-5.6 Sol leads 8, Mimo v2 Omni leads 1. Every overall index that rates both puts GPT-5.6 Sol ahead.

Overall indexGPT-5.6 Sol (max)Mimo v2 OmniLeader
BenchLeader Index65.458.9GPT-5.6 Sol
Arena Text1485†1431GPT-5.6 Sol

Each publisher runs its own tasks, harnesses and effort settings, so their overall verdicts can differ; BenchLeader reconciles them on one scale. † measured at another effort setting of the same model (the publisher did not test the one compared here).

Price, speed and latency

List prices blended at three input tokens per output token. Per-task prices use the token counts on the methodology page; suite cost is what Artificial Analysis paid to run its whole Intelligence Index.

MeasureGPT-5.6 Sol (max)Mimo v2 Omni
Blended price per 1M tokens$8.00–
Input / output per 1M$4.00 / $20.00– / –
Cached input per 1M$0.400–
Price per task: chat reply$0.0076–
Price per task: summarize a 30-page report$0.060–
Price per task: code edit$0.054–
Price per task: agentic coding session$0.320–
Price per task: structured extraction$0.012–
Output speed85 tok/s–
Time to first answer86.2 s–
Time to a complete answer92.1 s–

Each model is compared at its best-ranked reasoning-effort setting. GPT-5.6 Sol (max) scores 65.4 and takes 86 s to its first answer token; GPT-5.6 Sol (xhigh) scores 64.4 in 22 s, GPT-5.6 Sol (high) scores 63.6 in 11 s. Mimo v2 Omni scores 58.9. Higher effort means more thinking before the answer: better scores, longer waits and more tokens billed. How reasoning effort changes scores and cost.

Every benchmark

128 benchmarks, grouped by category; each name links to the board and its leaders. † measured at another effort setting of the same model, shown for reference and not counted as a win.

MetricPublisherGPT-5.6 Sol (max)Mimo v2 Omni
BenchLeader IndexBenchLeader65.458.9
Agents & tools scoreBenchLeader66.664.8
Coding scoreBenchLeader65.862.1
Instruction following scoreBenchLeader71.166.5
Knowledge scoreBenchLeader63.9–
Long context scoreBenchLeader66.961.4
Maths scoreBenchLeader70.861.0
Multimodal scoreBenchLeader66.255.9
Reasoning scoreBenchLeader65.161.9
Human preference scoreBenchLeader–61.1
Blended price $/MBenchLeader$8.00–
Output speedBenchLeader85 tok/s–
Time to first answerBenchLeader86.2 s–
Context windowBenchLeader1,050,000 tokens256,000 tokens
Reasoning
GPQA DiamondEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub93.5%–
SimpleBenchSimpleBench64.8%†–
Arena Hard PromptsArena (LMArena)1512†1458
LiveBench 1.0 ReasoningLiveBench91.7%–
GPQA Diamond (AA)Artificial Analysis94.1%85.5%
Humanity's Last Exam (AA)Artificial Analysis49.5%22.6%
GPQA Diamond (Vals)Vals AI95.2%–
EnigmaEvalScale AI SEAL37.1%†–
Kagi LLM BenchmarkKagi LLM Benchmark67.0%†–
ARC-AGI-1ARC Prize96.5%–
ARC-AGI-2ARC Prize92.5%–
ARC-AGI-3ARC Prize7.8%–
CritPtArtificial Analysis32.3%0.9%
CritPt v2 hard subset (AA)Artificial Analysis56.0%–
MysteryMechanismVals AI33.3%–
Chess PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub59.0%–
Mystery Game PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub58.0%–
LMCAEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub58.4%–
DTBenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub95.5%–
ForecastBenchForecastBench65.5%–
BTF-3Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub13.7%–
Coding
SciCodeSciCode57.1%–
WeirdMLWeirdML87.0%–
FrontierCodeCognition47.5%†–
GSO-BenchGSO-Bench76.5%†–
Show all 128 benchmarks
MetricPublisherGPT-5.6 Sol (max)Mimo v2 Omni
Coding
Arena CodingArena (LMArena)1534†1488
Arena WebDevArena (LMArena)1616†–
LiveBench 1.0 CodingLiveBench83.9%–
LiveCodeBenchVals AI82.6%–
IOIVals AI91.2%–
SWE-bench (Vals)Vals AI96.2%–
Code MigrationVals AI52.9%–
ProgramBenchVals AI1.5%–
Vibe Code Bench 1-100Vals AI20.0%–
Vibe Code Bench v1.1Vals AI80.5%–
SWE Atlas: Codebase QnAScale AI SEAL46.0%†–
SWE Atlas: Test WritingScale AI SEAL45.9%†–
MirrorCodeEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub20.0%†–
Surface Evolver BenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub93.1%†–
DeepSWE v1.1Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub72.7%–
CursorBenchCursor41.7%–
ALE-BenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub2176.9–
FrontierSWEEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub32.2%–
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA)Artificial Analysis39.9%–
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis88.0%–
Startrise FrontendStartrise66.2%†–
Agents & tools
Terminal-BenchTerminal-Bench37.3%–
OSWorld-Verified 2.0OSWorld27.3%–
Arena AgentArena (LMArena)6.1†–
LiveBench Agentic CodingLiveBench56.2%–
Terminal-Bench HardArtificial Analysis65.9%35.6%
τ²-Bench Telecom (AA)Artificial Analysis85.1%88.0%
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)Vals AI85.8%–
HiL-BenchScale AI SEAL32.3%†–
τ³-bench Bankingτ²-bench46.9%†–
τ³-Banking (AA)Artificial Analysis44.3%–
ITBench SRE (AA)Artificial Analysis56.2%–
Analyst Agent (AA)Artificial Analysis47.5%–
CUA-benchVals AI8.3%–
CyberBenchVals AI76.3%–
Finance Agent v2Vals AI53.8%–
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1Vals AI2.5%–
Legal Research BenchVals AI48.1%–
SkillsBenchVals AI54.1%–
SREBenchVals AI30.5%–
Tax Agent BenchVals AI31.1%–
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals)Vals AI37.9%–
Terminal-Bench ScienceVals AI20.0%–
Time Horizon Index: KSPVals AI23.8%–
Web Search IndexVals AI43.6%–
Arena SearchArena (LMArena)1258†–
BALROGBALROG60.0%–
PostTrainBenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub36.2%–
GBAEvalEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub52.6%†–
Vending-Bench 2Andon Labs9619.4†–
AutomationBenchArtificial Analysis60.1%–
GDP.pdf (AA)Artificial Analysis27.2%–
EnterpriseOps-GymArtificial Analysis42.9%–
AA-Briefcase v1.1Artificial Analysis1478–
Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis22.4%–
FACTS SearchGoogle88.5%†–
Maths
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub89.1%–
FrontierMath Tier 4Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub82.9%–
OTIS Mock AIMEEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub100.0%–
ProofBenchVals AI83.0%–
LiveBench MathematicsLiveBench96.2%–
Arena MathsArena (LMArena)1496†1434
Knowledge
SimpleQA VerifiedEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub69.7%–
LiveBench 1.0 Data AnalysisLiveBench79.8%–
MMLU-ProVals AI89.1%–
LegalBenchVals AI87.0%–
CorpFinVals AI64.4%–
TaxEvalVals AI74.8%–
PRBench FinanceScale AI SEAL50.5%–
PRBench LegalScale AI SEAL50.5%–
BioMysteryBenchVals AI71.1%–
Excel Modeling BenchmarkVals AI72.3%–
MedCodeVals AI44.0%–
MedScribeVals AI85.2%–
Public Benefits Bench v1.1Vals AI66.5%–
DrugDiscoveryBenchScale AI SEAL56.5%–
EBR-benchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub44.8%–
GDP.pdfEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub30.7%–
Instruction following
LiveBench LanguageLiveBench87.7%–
LiveBench Instruction FollowingLiveBench71.8%–
IFBenchArtificial Analysis72.7%67.3%
Arena Instruction FollowingArena (LMArena)1491†1428
Human preference
Arena TextArena (LMArena)1485†1431
EQ-Bench 4EQ-Bench1236†–
Arena Creative WritingArena (LMArena)1470†1395
Arena Multi-turnArena (LMArena)1490†1452
Arena Longer QueriesArena (LMArena)1499†1450
Multimodal
Arena VisionArena (LMArena)1281†1228
MMMU-ProArtificial Analysis83.4%73.9%
MMMU-Pro (Vals)Vals AI88.8%–
MortgageTaxVals AI67.3%–
Blueprint-Bench 2Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub33.6%†–
Long context
AA-LCR v1.1Artificial Analysis84.0%73.3%
Arena DocumentArena (LMArena)1489†–
MLCRArtificial Analysis30.0%–
Composite
Epoch Capabilities IndexEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub162.8†–
LiveBench 1.0LiveBench81.0%–
AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2Artificial Analysis47.025.1
AA Progress Index v1Artificial Analysis331.5269
Vals RSI IndexVals AI23.9%–
Vals Science IndexVals AI41.5%–
Vals Multimodal IndexVals AI72.6%–
Safety & honesty
FORTRESSScale AI SEAL20.1%†–

Data as of 2026-10-29. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.

What changed

  • GPT-5.6 Sol (max): 2 new results (AA Progress Index v1, CritPt v2 hard subset (AA)).
  • Mimo v2 Omni: 1 new result (AA Progress Index v1).
  • GPT-5.6 Sol (max): 1 new result (AA-Briefcase v1.1).
  • GPT-5.6 Sol (max): 3 new results (Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1, Vals RSI Index, Vals Science Index).
  • GPT-5.6 Sol (max): 1 score revision.
  • GPT-5.6 Sol (max): 1 new result (ForecastBench).
  • Mimo v2 Omni: BenchLeader Index 57.5 → 58.7.
  • GPT-5.6 Sol (max): 5 new results (AutomationBench, GDP.pdf (AA), MLCR…).
  • Mimo v2 Omni: 7 score revisions.
  • GPT-5.6 Sol (max): 1 score revision.

Rankings: Best LLM overall · Best LLM for agents · Best cheap LLMs

GPT-5.6 Sol vs Mimo v2 Omni: questions

Is GPT-5.6 Sol better than Mimo v2 Omni?
GPT-5.6 Sol (max) leads on quality: 65.4 vs 58.9. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; GPT-5.6 Sol (max) is ahead overall as of 29 Oct 2026, but check the category scores for your use.
Is GPT-5.6 Sol or Mimo v2 Omni better for coding?
GPT-5.6 Sol scores higher in coding (66 vs 62 on the category index, where 50 is average).
Is GPT-5.6 Sol or Mimo v2 Omni better for agents and tool use?
GPT-5.6 Sol scores higher in agentic tasks (67 vs 65 on the category index, where 50 is average). On Terminal-Bench Hard, the top shared agents & tools benchmark, it is 65.9% for GPT-5.6 Sol against 35.6% for Mimo v2 Omni.
Which is better for long documents?
GPT-5.6 Sol scores higher on long-context benchmarks (67 vs 61). GPT-5.6 Sol accepts more context: 1,050,000 against 256,000 tokens for Mimo v2 Omni.
Do independent benchmarks agree on GPT-5.6 Sol vs Mimo v2 Omni?
Across the 9 benchmarks both have, GPT-5.6 Sol leads 8, Mimo v2 Omni leads 1. Every overall index that rates both puts GPT-5.6 Sol ahead.
More questions (1)
When was GPT-5.6 Sol released?
GPT-5.6 Sol was released on 9 Jul 2026.