LLMBenchmark.ai

Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-4o (2024-08-06) vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash

Updated October 21, 2026. 32 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

GPT-4o (2024-08-06)OpenAI
Coding
23.1
Overall
7.7
Output $/M
$10.00
0
MiMo-V2.6-FlashXiaomi
Coding
61.9
Overall
37.9
Output $/M
$0.28
32
vs boards won of 32 shared

Decision reading

Pick MiMo-V2.6-Flash for coding: it scores 61.9 on the Vibe Coding Index against 23.1 for GPT-4o (2024-08-06).

GPT-4o (2024-08-06) is neither cheaper nor larger in context, and leads no benchmark both models were measured on.

Shared results
32
GPT-4o (2024-08-06) only
26
MiMo-V2.6-Flash only
34
Like-for-like categories
6 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
GPT-4o (2024-08-06) 23.1 from 1 benchmark, MiMo-V2.6-Flash 61.9 from 1 benchmark.
Widest category
Reasoning, 36.6 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena Text: expert: GPT-4o (2024-08-06) 1241 against MiMo-V2.6-Flash 1496, 42.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-4o (2024-08-06) $10.00 against MiMo-V2.6-Flash $0.28 per million output tokens, 35.7x apart.
Context window
GPT-4o (2024-08-06) takes 128K tokens, MiMo-V2.6-Flash 1.05M.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGPT-4o (2024-08-06)BarsMiMo-V2.6-FlashTies
Coding02
Intelligence01
Reasoning04
Math02
Knowledge04
General019
All shared boards032
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and MiMo-V2.6-Flash
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)MiMo-V2.6-FlashLeader
Aider polyglot23.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
SWE-bench Lite21.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena WebDevNot measured1634Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)Not measured24.2%Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured79.0%Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured40.9%Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.5%Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
IOI (Vals AI)Not measured47.7%Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured76.4%Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)Not measured75.4%Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)31.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
SciCodeNot measured51.3%Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)8.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
ALE-BenchNot measured1244.2Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
LMArena Text: coding12831499MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text: software and IT12781497MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1648Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1641Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
LMArena WebDev: from an imageNot measured1596Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and MiMo-V2.6-Flash
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)MiMo-V2.6-FlashLeader
AA Intelligence Index7.737.9MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and MiMo-V2.6-Flash
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)MiMo-V2.6-FlashLeader
SREBench (Vals AI)Not measured4.2%Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured56.3%Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured28.5%Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured38.0%Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured13.3%Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured65.5%Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
BioMysteryBench (Vals AI)Not measured69.3%Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)Not measured4.3%Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
Vals Science IndexNot measured31.7%Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
τ²-Bench Telecom28.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and MiMo-V2.6-Flash
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)MiMo-V2.6-FlashLeader
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)Not measured21.6%Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)64.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)52.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)2.3%35.1%MiMo-V2.6-Flash
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)49.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
SimpleBench17.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Chess puzzles6.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts12641475MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text: expert12411496MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English12771493MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1276Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1283Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and MiMo-V2.6-Flash
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)MiMo-V2.6-FlashLeader
AIME14.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)75.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
MGSM (Vals AI)90.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
OTIS Mock AIME6.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 30.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
ProofBenchNot measured63.0%Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
MATH level 553.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: math12851476MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text: mathematical work12831478MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and MiMo-V2.6-Flash
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)MiMo-V2.6-FlashLeader
MMLU Pro74.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)80.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)39.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)71.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)61.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
MedQA (Vals AI)88.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured41.1%Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
SimpleQA Verified26.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
MMLU84.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: science12741462MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare12521439MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text: legal and government12751441MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text: business and finance12321454MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and MiMo-V2.6-Flash
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)MiMo-V2.6-FlashLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index019
General benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and MiMo-V2.6-Flash
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)MiMo-V2.6-FlashLeader
Vals IndexNot measured54.8%Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)Not measured67.6%Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured43.5%Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured85.3%Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
IFBench36.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)41.0%74.3%MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text12831453MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text: instruction following12671452MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text: creative writing12741403MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Vision10651256MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text: English12971476MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text: non-English12621431MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text: Chinese12541509MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text: German12571458MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text: Japanese12341359MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text: Korean12181425MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text: French12631480MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text: Spanish12691453MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text: Russian12721409MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1455Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn12791447MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text: longer queries12831459MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text: writing and language12901424MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12671415MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Vision: English10721269MiMo-V2.6-Flash
LMArena Vision: Chinese1009Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1270Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1231Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and MiMo-V2.6-Flash
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)MiMo-V2.6-FlashLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

GPT-4o (2024-08-06)$0.0075Fits in one request
MiMo-V2.6-Flash$0.0003Fits in one request

MiMo-V2.6-Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-4o (2024-08-06)$0.155Fits in one request
MiMo-V2.6-Flash$0.0078Fits in one request

MiMo-V2.6-Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-4o (2024-08-06)$0.600Exceeds the context window
MiMo-V2.6-Flash$0.031Fits in one request

MiMo-V2.6-Flash costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and MiMo-V2.6-Flash
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-4o (2024-08-06)Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Flash
MakerOpenAIXiaomi
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 6, 2024September 21, 2026
Context window128K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$2.50$0.14
Output $/Mtok$10.00$0.28
Coding index23.161.9
Independent measurements behind it11
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-4o (2024-08-06) better than MiMo-V2.6-Flash for coding?

Pick MiMo-V2.6-Flash for coding: it scores 61.9 on the Vibe Coding Index against 23.1 for GPT-4o (2024-08-06). GPT-4o (2024-08-06) is neither cheaper nor larger in context, and leads no benchmark both models were measured on.

Which is cheaper, GPT-4o (2024-08-06) or MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

GPT-4o (2024-08-06) costs $2.50 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2.6-Flash costs $0.14 and $0.28. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-4o (2024-08-06) or MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-4o (2024-08-06) vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash comparison based on?

32 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GPT-4o (2024-08-06)'s coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and MiMo-V2.6-Flash's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next