Qwen3.6 27B vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Qwen3.6 27B leads MiMo-V2.5-Pro on coding, 36.8 to 31.6 on the Vibe Coding Index, and MiMo-V2.5-Pro costs 3.0x less per output token ($0.9152 vs $2.70 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 16 benchmarks have a result for both.
Qwen3.6 27B or MiMo-V2.5-Pro: which to pick
Pick Qwen3.6 27B for coding: it scores 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index against 31.6 for MiMo-V2.5-Pro, though on 2 benchmarks against 4.
Pick MiMo-V2.5-Pro for output tokens 3.0x cheaper ($0.9152 vs $2.70 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.03 against $1.30).
- Shared results
- 16
- Qwen3.6 27B only
- 8
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro only
- 54
- Like-for-like categories
- 6 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
Qwen3.6 27B
Qwen3.6 27B scores 36.8 against 31.6.
2 and 4 benchmarks behind the scores
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads, 26.0 against 21.4.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads, 21.3 against 18.5.
Same board, both measured
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro has a GPQA Diamond result, 82.6%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro has a MMLU Pro result, 84.6%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro has a Design Arena: websites result, 1266.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
MiMo-V2.5-Pro takes 1.05M tokens against 262K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Qwen3.6 27B $0.0018, MiMo-V2.5-Pro $0.0009 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Qwen3.6 27B $1.30, MiMo-V2.5-Pro $0.03.
Published attempt cost and pass rate
At a glance
- Coding index
- Qwen3.6 27B 36.8 from 2 benchmarks, MiMo-V2.5-Pro 31.6 from 4 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Coding, 9.8 points apart on average over 5 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI): Qwen3.6 27B 11.9% against MiMo-V2.5-Pro 34.1%, 22.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Qwen3.6 27B $2.70 against MiMo-V2.5-Pro $0.9152 per million output tokens, 3.0x apart.
- Context window
- Qwen3.6 27B takes 262K tokens, MiMo-V2.5-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 | Qwen3.6 27B | Bars | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 5 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 1 | 1 tie | |
| Reasoning | 0 | 2 | ||
| Knowledge | 1 | 1 | ||
| General | 1 | 3 | ||
| All shared boards | 2 | 13 | 1 tie |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index05
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | Not measured | 1480 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| AA Coding Index | 53.7 | 60.2 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 81.3% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | 70.0% | 74.0% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 0.5% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 11.9% | 34.1% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | Not measured | 21.6% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 57.3% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| SciCode | 42.8% | 50.6% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 34.8% | 43.2% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| ALE-Bench | Not measured | 899.8 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | Not measured | 1501 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | Not measured | 1495 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena WebDev: React | Not measured | 1469 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | Not measured | 1473 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 21.4 | 26.0 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 146.2 | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 18.5 | 21.3 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | Not measured | 41.5% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 11.5% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 15.9% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | Not measured | 55.2% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 94.2% | 94.2% | Tie |
| Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | Not measured | 82.6% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 84.2% | 86.6% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 23.1% | 35.7% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 85.9% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | 7.0% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | Not measured | 1486 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | Not measured | 1501 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | Not measured | 1494 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME | 91.1% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 35.1% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| ProofBench | Not measured | 22.0% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: math | Not measured | 1481 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | Not measured | 1491 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | Not measured | 84.6% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 77.1% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | 53.2% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 62.3% | 61.4% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 71.3% | 73.8% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | 68.3% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | Not measured | 32.5% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: science | Not measured | 1482 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | Not measured | 1473 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | Not measured | 1474 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | Not measured | 1466 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | Not measured | 1266 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | Not measured | 1246 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | Not measured | 1261 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | Not measured | 1257 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | Not measured | 1243 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | Not measured | 1265 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Design Arena: SVG | Not measured | 1181 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | Not measured | 1156 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13
| Benchmark | Qwen3.6 27B | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAGE (Vals AI) | 45.6% | Not measured | Only Qwen3.6 27B measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | Not measured | 83.7% | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| IFBench | 67.6% | 79.9% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 77.3% | 79.7% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| DTBench | 78.1% | 84.5% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
| LMCA | 34.5% | 29.5% | Qwen3.6 27B |
| LMArena Text | Not measured | 1464 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | Not measured | 1475 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | Not measured | 1438 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: English | Not measured | 1477 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | Not measured | 1448 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | Not measured | 1507 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: German | Not measured | 1459 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | Not measured | 1410 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | Not measured | 1435 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: French | Not measured | 1487 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | Not measured | 1469 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | Not measured | 1449 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: Polish | Not measured | 1464 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | Not measured | 1476 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | Not measured | 1481 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | Not measured | 1451 | Only MiMo-V2.5-Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | Not measured | 1438 | Only MiMo-V2.5-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 | Qwen3.6 27B | MiMo-V2.5-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
MiMo-V2.5-Pro costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
MiMo-V2.5-Pro costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
MiMo-V2.5-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 | Qwen3.6 27B | Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Qwen | Xiaomi |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | April 27, 2026 | April 22, 2026 |
| Context window | 262K | 1.05M |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.45 | $0.4575 |
| Output $/Mtok | $2.70 | $0.9152 |
| Coding index | 36.8 | 31.6 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 2 | 4 |
| Cost per solved task | $1.30 | $0.03 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Qwen3.6 27B better than MiMo-V2.5-Pro for coding?
Pick Qwen3.6 27B for coding: it scores 36.8 on the Vibe Coding Index against 31.6 for MiMo-V2.5-Pro, though on 2 benchmarks against 4. Pick MiMo-V2.5-Pro for output tokens 3.0x cheaper ($0.9152 vs $2.70 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.03 against $1.30).
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.6 27B or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
Qwen3.6 27B costs $0.45 per million input tokens and $2.70 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2.5-Pro costs $0.4575 and $0.9152. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, Qwen3.6 27B costs $1.30 and MiMo-V2.5-Pro $0.03.
Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3.6 27B or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks is the Qwen3.6 27B vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro comparison based on?
16 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Qwen3.6 27B's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and MiMo-V2.5-Pro's on 4. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.