Qwen-Plus vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro
Qwen-Plus and MiMo-V2.6-Pro cost about the same per output token ($0.78 vs $0.87 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 22 benchmarks have a result for both.
Qwen-Plus or MiMo-V2.6-Pro: which to pick
Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro has a coding score, 65.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen-Plus has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Qwen-Plus for output tokens 1.1x cheaper ($0.78 vs $0.87 per million).
- Shared results
- 22
- Qwen-Plus only
- 6
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro only
- 51
- Like-for-like categories
- 5 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
No call
Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro has a AA Intelligence Index result, 46.3.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro has a Design Arena: websites result, 1308.
Directional only
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 1M.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen-Plus
Qwen-Plus $0.0006, MiMo-V2.6-Pro $0.0009 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Qwen-Plus not benchmarked, MiMo-V2.6-Pro 65.4 from 4 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Reasoning, 33.0 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- LMArena Text: expert: Qwen-Plus 1328 against MiMo-V2.6-Pro 1541, 35.6 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Qwen-Plus $0.78 against MiMo-V2.6-Pro $0.87 per million output tokens, 1.1x apart.
- Context window
- Qwen-Plus takes 1M 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 | Qwen-Plus | Bars | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 2 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 3 | ||
| Math | 0 | 2 | ||
| Knowledge | 0 | 4 | ||
| General | 0 | 11 | ||
| All shared boards | 0 | 22 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench coding | Not measured | 81.5% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| LMArena WebDev | Not measured | 1625 | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 31.3% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 85.2% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| 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 |
| SciCode | Not measured | 60.9% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| ALE-Bench | Not measured | 1158.1 | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1328 | 1533 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1343 | 1528 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena WebDev: React | Not measured | 1639 | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | Not measured | 1616 | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| LMArena WebDev: from an image | Not measured | 1598 | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | Not measured | 46.3 | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index12 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: agents building web apps | Not measured | 1290 | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro 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 |
| APEX-Agents | Not measured | 54.4% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 49.4% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 48.1% | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1317 | 1511 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1328 | 1541 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1333 | 1520 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Vision: diagrams | Not measured | 1281 | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| LMArena Vision: homework | Not measured | 1264 | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME | 17.8% | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| ProofBench | Not measured | 70.0% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| MATH level 5 | 65.3% | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1326 | 1500 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1332 | 1511 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MedCode (Vals AI) | Not measured | 45.0% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1352 | 1506 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1350 | 1497 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1349 | 1485 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1303 | 1468 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | Not measured | 1308 | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | Not measured | 1339 | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | Not measured | 1313 | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | Not measured | 1336 | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | Not measured | 1331 | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | Not measured | 1316 | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| LiveBench design | Not measured | 78.5% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index011
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | 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) | Not measured | 45.0% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | Not measured | 88.3% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | Not measured | 86.3% | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| DTBench | 81.1% | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMCA | 24.0% | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text | 1326 | 1491 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1303 | 1491 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1292 | 1466 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Vision | Not measured | 1263 | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1339 | 1504 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1310 | 1474 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1347 | 1529 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1251 | Not measured | Only Qwen-Plus measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1323 | 1479 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1336 | 1466 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1324 | 1501 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1296 | 1470 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1270 | 1465 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
| LMArena Vision: English | Not measured | 1268 | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| LMArena Vision: reading text | Not measured | 1270 | Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen-Plus | 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
Qwen-Plus costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen-Plus costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen-Plus 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 | Qwen-Plus | Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Qwen | Xiaomi |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | February 1, 2025 | September 21, 2026 |
| Context window | 1M | 1.05M |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.26 | $0.435 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.78 | $0.87 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 65.4 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 4 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Qwen-Plus better than MiMo-V2.6-Pro for coding?
Only MiMo-V2.6-Pro has a coding score, 65.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen-Plus has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen-Plus for output tokens 1.1x cheaper ($0.78 vs $0.87 per million).
Which is cheaper, Qwen-Plus or MiMo-V2.6-Pro?
Qwen-Plus costs $0.26 per million input tokens and $0.78 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2.6-Pro costs $0.435 and $0.87. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Qwen-Plus or MiMo-V2.6-Pro?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks is the Qwen-Plus vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro comparison based on?
22 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Qwen-Plus's coding index rests on 0 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.