Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Qwen3.6 Plus vs MiMo-V2.5

MiMo-V2.5 leads Qwen3.6 Plus on coding, 50.0 to 44.1 on the Vibe Coding Index, and MiMo-V2.5 costs 5.8x less per output token ($0.336 vs $1.95 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 68 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Qwen3.6 Plus Replace MiMo-V2.5
Qwen3.6 PlusQwen
Coding
44.1
Overall
56.2
Output $/M
$1.95
41
MiMo-V2.5Xiaomi
Coding
50.0
Overall
50.7
Output $/M
$0.336
27
vs boards won of 68 shared

Qwen3.6 Plus or MiMo-V2.5: which to pick

Pick MiMo-V2.5 for coding: it scores 50.0 on the Vibe Coding Index against 44.1 for Qwen3.6 Plus.

Pick Qwen3.6 Plus for work measured by LMArena WebDev or LiveCodeBench (Vals AI), where it leads.

Model AQwen3.6 PlusQwen44.1/1003 independent benchmarks$1.19 per solved taskModel BMiMo-V2.5Xiaomi50.0/1003 independent benchmarks$0.01 per solved task
Shared results
68
Qwen3.6 Plus only
15
MiMo-V2.5 only
12
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.

At a glance

Coding index
Qwen3.6 Plus 44.1 from 3 benchmarks, MiMo-V2.5 50.0 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 7.8 points apart on average over 5 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI): Qwen3.6 Plus 32.9% against MiMo-V2.5 55.1%, 22.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Qwen3.6 Plus $1.95 against MiMo-V2.5 $0.336 per million output tokens, 5.8x apart.
Context window
Qwen3.6 Plus takes 1M tokens, MiMo-V2.5 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
CategoryQwen3.6 PlusBarsMiMo-V2.5Ties
Coding76
Intelligence10
Agentic work32
Reasoning43
Math11
Knowledge82
Web design08
General175
All shared boards4127
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index76
Coding benchmarks for Qwen3.6 Plus and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkQwen3.6 PlusMiMo-V2.5Leader
LMArena WebDev14611438Qwen3.6 Plus
AA Coding Index54.556.8MiMo-V2.5
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)86.0%81.5%Qwen3.6 Plus
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)73.4%71.0%Qwen3.6 Plus
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)25.6%42.2%MiMo-V2.5
Code migration (Vals AI)11.1%14.2%MiMo-V2.5
ProgramBench (Vals AI)0.0%Not measuredOnly Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)53.2%60.7%MiMo-V2.5
SciCodeNot measured43.9%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)43.9%41.7%Qwen3.6 Plus
ALE-Bench670.1514.0Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: coding14671469MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text: software and IT14621463MiMo-V2.5
LMArena WebDev: React14541425Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena WebDev: HTML14631429Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena WebDev: from an image1472Not measuredOnly Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Qwen3.6 Plus and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkQwen3.6 PlusMiMo-V2.5Leader
AA Intelligence Index27.021.8Qwen3.6 Plus
Epoch Capabilities Index147.3Not measuredOnly Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index32
Agentic work benchmarks for Qwen3.6 Plus and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkQwen3.6 PlusMiMo-V2.5Leader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured15.8Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)40.9%36.7%Qwen3.6 Plus
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)7.7%7.8%MiMo-V2.5
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)14.9%9.1%Qwen3.6 Plus
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)32.9%55.1%MiMo-V2.5
τ²-Bench Telecom97.7%90.6%Qwen3.6 Plus
Vending-Bench 2$5,115Not measuredOnly Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index43
Reasoning benchmarks for Qwen3.6 Plus and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkQwen3.6 PlusMiMo-V2.5Leader
GPQA Diamond87.4%81.6%Qwen3.6 Plus
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)84.2%80.0%Qwen3.6 Plus
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)88.2%84.9%Qwen3.6 Plus
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)27.8%27.2%Qwen3.6 Plus
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)88.4%Not measuredOnly Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Chess puzzles14.0%Not measuredOnly Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Mystery game puzzles12.0%Not measuredOnly Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14481450MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text: expert14541459MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14551461MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1269Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1262Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
Math benchmarks for Qwen3.6 Plus and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkQwen3.6 PlusMiMo-V2.5Leader
AIME94.6%Not measuredOnly Qwen3.6 Plus measured
OTIS Mock AIME93.3%Not measuredOnly Qwen3.6 Plus measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 338.2%Not measuredOnly Qwen3.6 Plus measured
ProofBenchNot measured16.0%Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: math14491436Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: mathematical work14481451MiMo-V2.5
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index82
Knowledge benchmarks for Qwen3.6 Plus and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkQwen3.6 PlusMiMo-V2.5Leader
MMLU Pro87.7%82.9%Qwen3.6 Plus
LegalBench (Vals AI)84.2%78.9%Qwen3.6 Plus
CaseLaw (Vals AI)51.5%Not measuredOnly Qwen3.6 Plus measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)61.9%59.9%Qwen3.6 Plus
TaxEval (Vals AI)74.7%71.8%Qwen3.6 Plus
MortgageTax (Vals AI)68.0%59.3%Qwen3.6 Plus
MedCode (Vals AI)36.9%31.9%Qwen3.6 Plus
SimpleQA Verified44.1%Not measuredOnly Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: science14391440MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14421432Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: legal and government14371425Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: business and finance14301432MiMo-V2.5
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index08
Web design benchmarks for Qwen3.6 Plus and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkQwen3.6 PlusMiMo-V2.5Leader
Design Arena: websites12431265MiMo-V2.5
Design Arena: UI components12301255MiMo-V2.5
Design Arena: game dev12111249MiMo-V2.5
Design Arena: data viz12281250MiMo-V2.5
Design Arena: 3D12021215MiMo-V2.5
Design Arena: all code categories12361260MiMo-V2.5
Design Arena: SVG11611179MiMo-V2.5
Design Arena: ASCII art11131140MiMo-V2.5
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index175
General benchmarks for Qwen3.6 Plus and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkQwen3.6 PlusMiMo-V2.5Leader
SAGE (Vals AI)44.9%43.3%Qwen3.6 Plus
MedScribe (Vals AI)77.0%72.2%Qwen3.6 Plus
Vals Multimodal Index51.5%52.8%MiMo-V2.5
IFBench75.2%67.1%Qwen3.6 Plus
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)78.3%73.0%Qwen3.6 Plus
DTBench81.9%Not measuredOnly Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMCA33.1%Not measuredOnly Qwen3.6 Plus measured
CL-bench20.3%Not measuredOnly Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text14361428Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: instruction following14241435MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text: creative writing14041393Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena VisionNot measured1247Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Text: English14451447MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text: non-English14241405Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: Chinese14771469Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: German14511421Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: Japanese13901306Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: Korean13791361Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: French14551448Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: Spanish14321414Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: Russian14341396Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: Polish14331413Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: multi-turn14381445MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text: longer queries14391445MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text: writing and language14181409Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14021399Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1259Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1326Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1256Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1226Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1189Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1230Only MiMo-V2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Qwen3.6 Plus and MiMo-V2.5
BenchmarkQwen3.6 PlusMiMo-V2.5Leader
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

Qwen3.6 Plus$0.0013Fits in one request
MiMo-V2.5$0.0003Fits in one request

MiMo-V2.5 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Qwen3.6 Plus$0.022Fits in one request
MiMo-V2.5$0.0094Fits in one request

MiMo-V2.5 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Qwen3.6 Plus$0.085Fits in one request
MiMo-V2.5$0.037Fits in one request

MiMo-V2.5 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 Qwen3.6 Plus and MiMo-V2.5
SpecificationQwen3.6 PlusXiaomi MiMo-V2.5
MakerQwenXiaomi
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedApril 2, 2026April 22, 2026
Context window1M1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.325$0.168
Output $/Mtok$1.95$0.336
Coding index44.150.0
Independent measurements behind it33
Cost per solved task$1.19$0.01
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Qwen3.6 Plus better than MiMo-V2.5 for coding?

Pick MiMo-V2.5 for coding: it scores 50.0 on the Vibe Coding Index against 44.1 for Qwen3.6 Plus. Pick Qwen3.6 Plus for work measured by LMArena WebDev or LiveCodeBench (Vals AI), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.6 Plus or MiMo-V2.5?

Qwen3.6 Plus costs $0.325 per million input tokens and $1.95 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2.5 costs $0.168 and $0.336. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, Qwen3.6 Plus costs $1.19 and MiMo-V2.5 $0.01.

Which has the bigger context window, Qwen3.6 Plus or MiMo-V2.5?

MiMo-V2.5, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks is the Qwen3.6 Plus vs MiMo-V2.5 comparison based on?

68 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Qwen3.6 Plus's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and MiMo-V2.5's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next

Embed this comparison on your site

Free under CC BY 4.0, while the source link stays visible. Preview the frame · Terms and other embeds

<iframe src="https://llmbenchmark.ai/embed/compare/qwen3-6-plus-vs-xiaomi-mimo-v2-5" title="Qwen3.6 Plus vs MiMo-V2.5, LLMBenchmark.ai" width="100%" height="360" style="border:0;max-width:100%" loading="lazy"></iframe>
<p style="font:13px/1.4 sans-serif;margin:6px 0 0">Source: <a href="https://llmbenchmark.ai/compare/qwen3-6-plus-vs-xiaomi-mimo-v2-5">LLMBenchmark.ai, Qwen3.6 Plus vs MiMo-V2.5</a></p>