MiMo-V2.6-Pro vs Qwen3 6
MiMo-V2.6-Pro 
Qwen3 6 Verdict
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads on quality: 64.3 vs 63.0.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro is stronger in composite, knowledge, long context, reasoning.
- Qwen3 6 (max) is stronger in agents & tools, coding, human preference, instruction following, maths.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro is 5.3× cheaper ($0.548 vs $2.92 per 1M blended).
| Metric | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3 6 (max) |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 64.3 | 63.0 |
| Agents & tools score | 55.1 | 71.9 |
| Composite score | 84.8 | 63.2 |
| Knowledge score | 66.8 | 63.5 |
| Long context score | 69.1 | 66.1 |
| Reasoning score | 88.8 | 58.9 |
| Coding score | – | 58.0 |
| Human preference score | – | 65.7 |
| Instruction following score | – | 74.4 |
| Maths score | – | 66.0 |
| Blended price $/M | $0.548 | $2.92 |
| Output speed | 54 tok/s | 64 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 39.8 s | 34.5 s |
| Context window | 1.0M | 262k |
| GPQA Diamond | – | 87.4% |
| OTIS Mock AIME | – | 91.1% |
| SWE-bench Verified (Epoch) | – | 76.7% |
| SimpleQA Verified | – | 52.0% |
| SimpleBench | – | 63.0% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | – | 149.3 |
| LMArena Text | – | 1460 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | – | 1482 |
| LMArena Coding | – | 1509 |
| LMArena WebDev | – | 1479 |
| AA Intelligence Index | 46.3 | 28.4 |
| IFBench | – | 76.6% |
| AA-LCR | 86.3% | 80.7% |
| AA-Omniscience | 8.4 | 9.2 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | – | 43.9% |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | – | 88.8% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 49.4% | 30.8% |
| SciCode (AA) | 60.9% | – |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | – | 95.9% |
| CorpFin | – | 66.5% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals) | 67.8% | – |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | – | 72.8% |
| Vals Index | 59.7 | – |
| CritPt | 26.6% | 3.7% |
| GDPval (AA) | 58.7% | – |
| CaseLaw v2 | – | 47.9% |
| 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 2.0 (Vals) | – | 51.7% |
| Terminal-Bench Science | 2.9% | – |
| Vibe Code Bench v1.1 | 85.2% | – |
| LMArena Maths | – | 1475 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | – | 1438 |
| LMArena Instruction Following | – | 1449 |
| LMArena Multi-turn | – | 1469 |
| LMArena Longer Queries | – | 1474 |
| Chess Puzzles | – | 20.0% |
| LMCA | – | 42.5% |
| DTBench | – | 87.2% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | – | 4254.2 |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA) | 34.9% | – |
| AutomationBench | 58.6% | – |
| GDP.pdf | 19.2% | – |
| AA-Omniscience: accuracy | 34.9% | 37.9% |
| AA-Omniscience: non-hallucination | 59.4% | 53.8% |
| AA-Briefcase | 1522 | – |
Data as of 2026-09-23. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
MiMo-V2.6-Pro vs Qwen3 6: questions
- Is MiMo-V2.6-Pro better than Qwen3 6?
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads on quality: 64.3 vs 63.0. 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 MiMo-V2.6-Pro better than Qwen3 6 for agentic tasks?
- Qwen3 6 scores higher in agentic tasks (72 vs 55 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.6-Pro or Qwen3 6?
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper: $0.548 against $2.92 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, MiMo-V2.6-Pro or Qwen3 6?
- Qwen3 6 streams faster: 64 against 54 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro accepts more context: 1.0M against 262k tokens.