The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

LongCat-Flash-Thinking vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 45.6 to 28.6. MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 3.0x cheaper per token.

Meituan · Xiaomi · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 45.6 to 28.6, ranking #29 overall.

On price, MiMo-V2.6-Flash is roughly 3.0x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

MiMo-V2.6-Flash also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose LongCat-Flash-Thinking

  • you want predictable pricing at $0.30/M input and $1.20/M output

Choose MiMo-V2.6-Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 45.6 and ranks #29 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • cost matters — it's about 3.0x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

LongCat-Flash-Thinking
Meituan
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Xiaomi
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
28.6
#136
45.6
#29
Reasoning
28.8
#127
42.5
#45
Coding
14.0
#138
36.7
#21
Agents
13.0
#98
33.1
#26
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.30 / M
$0.14 / M
Output price
$1.20 / M
$0.28 / M
Context window
128,000
1,048,576

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
LongCat-Flash-Thinking
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Tool use
15.5#85
24.7#29
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

14 reported for LongCat-Flash-Thinking · 16 for MiMo-V2.6-Flash

No common benchmarks found

LongCat-Flash-Thinking and MiMo-V2.6-Flashdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

MiMo-V2.6-Flash costs less

For input processing, LongCat-Flash-Thinking ($0.30/1M tokens) is 2.1x more expensive than MiMo-V2.6-Flash ($0.14/1M tokens).

For output processing, LongCat-Flash-Thinking ($1.20/1M tokens) is 4.3x more expensive than MiMo-V2.6-Flash ($0.28/1M tokens).

In conclusion, LongCat-Flash-Thinking is more expensive than MiMo-V2.6-Flash.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Tue Sep 22 2026 • llm-stats.com
Meituan
LongCat-Flash-Thinking
Input tokens$0.30
Output tokens$1.20
Best providerMeituan
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Input tokens$0.14
Output tokens$0.28
Best providerXiaomi
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

251.0B diff

LongCat-Flash-Thinking has 251.0B more parameters than MiMo-V2.6-Flash, making it 81.2% larger.

Meituan
LongCat-Flash-Thinking
560.0Bparameters
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
309.0Bparameters
560.0B
LongCat-Flash-Thinking
309.0B
MiMo-V2.6-Flash

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

MiMo-V2.6-Flash accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to LongCat-Flash-Thinking's 128,000 tokens. Only LongCat-Flash-Thinking specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Meituan
LongCat-Flash-Thinking
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output- tokens
Tue Sep 22 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

MiMo-V2.6-Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas LongCat-Flash-Thinking does not.

MiMo-V2.6-Flash can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

LongCat-Flash-Thinking

Text
Images
Audio
Video

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Both models are licensed under MIT.

Both models share the same licensing terms, providing consistent usage rights.

LongCat-Flash-Thinking

MIT

Open weights

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

LongCat-Flash-Thinking was released on 2025-09-22, while MiMo-V2.6-Flash was released on 2026-09-22.

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 12 months newer than LongCat-Flash-Thinking.

LongCat-Flash-Thinking

Sep 22, 2025

12 months ago

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

Sep 22, 2026

-1 days ago

1.0yr newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

LongCat-Flash-Thinking is available from Meituan. MiMo-V2.6-Flash is available from Xiaomi.

LongCat-Flash-Thinking

meituan logo
Meituan
Input Price:Input: $0.30/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.20/1M

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

xiaomi logo
Xiaomi
Input Price:Input: $0.14/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.28/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against LongCat-Flash-Thinking and MiMo-V2.6-Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

LongCat-Flash-Thinking
✓ Preferred
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about LongCat-Flash-Thinking vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash.

Which is better, LongCat-Flash-Thinking or MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 45.6 to 28.6. LongCat-Flash-Thinking is made by Meituan and MiMo-V2.6-Flash is made by Xiaomi. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does LongCat-Flash-Thinking compare to MiMo-V2.6-Flash in benchmarks?

LongCat-Flash-Thinking scores MATH-500: 99.2%, ZebraLogic: 95.5%, AIME 2024: 93.3%, AIME 2025: 90.6%, MMLU-Redux: 89.3%. MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores CyberGym: 95.1%, Terminal-Bench 2.1: 87.6%, OSWorld-Verified: 80.8%, MiMo Cyber Bench: 77.2%, Toolathlon-Verified: 73.6%.

Is LongCat-Flash-Thinking cheaper than MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 2.1x cheaper for input tokens. LongCat-Flash-Thinking costs $0.30/M input and $1.20/M output via meituan. MiMo-V2.6-Flash costs $0.14/M input and $0.28/M output via xiaomi.

What are the context window sizes for LongCat-Flash-Thinking and MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

LongCat-Flash-Thinking supports 128K tokens and MiMo-V2.6-Flash supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between LongCat-Flash-Thinking and MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (28.6 vs 45.6), context window (128K vs 1.0M), input pricing ($0.30 vs $0.14/M), multimodal support (no vs yes). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes LongCat-Flash-Thinking and MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

LongCat-Flash-Thinking is developed by Meituan and MiMo-V2.6-Flash is developed by Xiaomi.

Related comparisons