GPT-5.2 vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro
MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads GPT-5.2 on coding, 65.4 to 55.9 on the Vibe Coding Index, and MiMo-V2.6-Pro costs 16.1x less per output token ($0.87 vs $14.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 45 benchmarks have a result for both.
vs boards won of 45 shared
GPT-5.2 or MiMo-V2.6-Pro: which to pick
Pick MiMo-V2.6-Pro for coding: it scores 65.4 on the Vibe Coding Index against 55.9 for GPT-5.2.
Pick GPT-5.2 for work measured by ALE-Bench or LMArena Vision: homework, where it leads.
Model AGPT-5.2OpenAI55.9/1003 independent benchmarks$1.91 per solved taskModel BMiMo-V2.6-ProXiaomi65.4/1004 independent benchmarksNo cost per solved task
- Shared results
- 45
- GPT-5.2 only
- 69
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro only
- 28
- Like-for-like categories
- 8 of 9
Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.
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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
MiMo-V2.6-Pro
MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 65.4 against 55.9.
3 and 4 benchmarks behind the scores
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
MiMo-V2.6-Pro
MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads, 46.3 against 30.4.
Same board, both measured
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only GPT-5.2 has a GPQA Diamond result, 91.7%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only GPT-5.2 has a AIME result, 96.9%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only GPT-5.2 has a MMLU Pro result, 86.2%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
MiMo-V2.6-Pro
MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads, 1308 against 1195.
Same board, both measured
General
Vals Index
No call
Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro has a Vals Index result, 57.8%.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
MiMo-V2.6-Pro
MiMo-V2.6-Pro takes 1.05M tokens against 400K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
MiMo-V2.6-Pro
GPT-5.2 $0.0088, MiMo-V2.6-Pro $0.0009 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only GPT-5.2 has the number, $1.91.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- GPT-5.2 55.9 from 3 benchmarks, MiMo-V2.6-Pro 65.4 from 4 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Math, 25.5 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- ProofBench: GPT-5.2 15.0% against MiMo-V2.6-Pro 70.0%, 55.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- GPT-5.2 $14.00 against MiMo-V2.6-Pro $0.87 per million output tokens, 16.1x apart.
- Context window
- GPT-5.2 takes 400K tokens, MiMo-V2.6-Pro 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.
| Category | GPT-5.2 | Bars | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 1 | 5 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 1 | 5 | ||
| Math | 0 | 3 | ||
| Knowledge | 1 | 4 | ||
| Web design | 0 | 6 | ||
| General | 1 | 16 | ||
| All shared boards | 4 | 41 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index15
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 72.8% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | 66.7% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| LiveBench coding | Not measured | 81.5% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| LMArena WebDev | 1417 | 1625 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 85.4% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | 75.8% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 31.3% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 53.5% | 85.2% | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | Not measured | 43.0% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| ProgramBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 0.5% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| IOI (Vals AI) | Not measured | 39.3% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 67.8% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI) | Not measured | 41.3% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| CyberBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 72.9% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 89.4% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 60.9% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 47.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| Terminal-Bench | 64.9% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| GSO-Bench | 27.5% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| WeirdML | 72.2% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| ALE-Bench | 1293.5 | 1158.1 | GPT-5.2 |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1442 | 1533 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1434 | 1528 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena WebDev: React | Not measured | 1639 | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1427 | 1616 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena WebDev: from an image | Not measured | 1598 | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 30.4 | 46.3 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 153.7 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: agents building web apps | 1086 | 1290 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps | 1043 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building mobile apps | 1093 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building Android apps | 1059 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building Godot games | 1142 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| LiveBench research | Not measured | 76.7% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| LiveBench browser | Not measured | 88.0% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| LiveBench long agentic | Not measured | 47.5% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| SREBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 3.0% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | Not measured | 57.3% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 32.4% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 47.1% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI) | Not measured | 13.8% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | Not measured | 62.9% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI) | Not measured | 2.9% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 84.8% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| APEX-Agents | Not measured | 54.4% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| METR time horizons | 75.3% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| Remote Labor Index | 2.5% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| GDPval | 49.7% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| DeepResearch Bench | 41.1% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| Vending-Bench 2 | $3,591 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) | 55.9% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index15
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 91.7% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| LiveBench reasoning | Not measured | 79.6% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| MysteryMechanism (Vals AI) | Not measured | 15.3% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| MMMU Pro (Vals AI) | 86.7% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 90.3% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 37.7% | 49.4% | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 91.4% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| ARC-AGI | 86.2% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 52.9% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| SimpleBench | 45.8% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| Chess puzzles | 48.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | 23.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| EBR-bench | 23.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| VPCT | 84.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1428 | 1511 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1445 | 1541 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1431 | 1520 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Vision: diagrams | 1265 | 1281 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Vision: homework | 1276 | 1264 | GPT-5.2 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 73.3% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | 96.9% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| MGSM (Vals AI) | 94.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| AA Math Index | 99.0 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 99.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 96.1% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 67.4% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| FrontierMath, tier 4 | 31.7% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| ProofBench | 15.0% | 70.0% | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: math | 1440 | 1500 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1442 | 1511 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index14
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | 86.2% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 82.8% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | 66.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 65.9% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 75.8% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | 67.1% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | 94.1% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | 49.8% | 45.0% | GPT-5.2 |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 87.4% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| SimpleQA Verified | 37.1% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1425 | 1506 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1425 | 1497 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1427 | 1485 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1414 | 1468 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| FACTS Benchmark Suite | 48.5% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here | |||
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1195 | 1308 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1190 | 1340 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1195 | 1314 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1202 | 1336 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| Design Arena: 3D | 1079 | 1330 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1170 | 1317 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| Design Arena: SVG | 1139 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | 1152 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| LiveBench design | Not measured | 78.5% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index116
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vals Index | Not measured | 57.8% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| LiveBench data analysis | Not measured | 72.3% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 68.9% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| SAGE (Vals AI) | 49.3% | 45.0% | GPT-5.2 |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | 84.4% | 88.3% | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| IFBench | 75.4% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 82.7% | 86.3% | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| DTBench | 90.9% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| LMCA | 43.9% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| CL-bench | 18.2% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| Furniture assembly | 38.3% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| LMArena Text | 1416 | 1491 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1409 | 1491 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1376 | 1466 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Vision | 1246 | 1263 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: English | 1422 | 1504 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1405 | 1474 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1447 | 1529 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: German | 1444 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1420 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1374 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| LMArena Text: French | 1454 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1413 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1415 | 1479 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: Polish | 1426 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1419 | 1466 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1413 | 1501 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1392 | 1470 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1378 | 1465 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Vision: English | 1243 | 1268 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Vision: Chinese | 1305 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| LMArena Vision: reading text | 1257 | 1270 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Vision: humor | 1227 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| LMArena Vision: captioning | 1267 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| LMArena Vision: recognizing things | 1232 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| LMArena Vision: creative writing | 1225 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| LMArena Document | 1405 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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-5.2$0.0088Fits in one request
MiMo-V2.6-Pro$0.0009Fits in one request
MiMo-V2.6-Pro costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
GPT-5.2$0.130Fits in one request
MiMo-V2.6-Pro$0.024Fits in one request
MiMo-V2.6-Pro costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
GPT-5.2$0.490Fits in one request
MiMo-V2.6-Pro$0.096Fits in one request
MiMo-V2.6-Pro 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.
| Specification | OpenAI GPT-5.2 | Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | Xiaomi |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | December 10, 2025 | September 21, 2026 |
| Context window | 400K | 1.05M |
| Input $/Mtok | $1.75 | $0.435 |
| Output $/Mtok | $14.00 | $0.87 |
| Coding index | 55.9 | 65.4 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 3 | 4 |
| Cost per solved task | $1.91 | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is GPT-5.2 better than MiMo-V2.6-Pro for coding?
Pick MiMo-V2.6-Pro for coding: it scores 65.4 on the Vibe Coding Index against 55.9 for GPT-5.2. Pick GPT-5.2 for work measured by ALE-Bench or LMArena Vision: homework, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.2 or MiMo-V2.6-Pro?
GPT-5.2 costs $1.75 per million input tokens and $14.00 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2.6-Pro costs $0.435 and $0.87. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.2 only.
Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.2 or MiMo-V2.6-Pro?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro, with 1.05M tokens against 400K.
How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.2 vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro comparison based on?
45 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-5.2's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and MiMo-V2.6-Pro's on 4. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.