The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

MAI-Thinking-1 vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 45.6 to 33.0.

Microsoft · Xiaomi · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 45.6 to 33.0, ranking #29 overall.

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

Choose MAI-Thinking-1

  • you are already invested in the Microsoft ecosystem

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
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

MAI-Thinking-1
Microsoft
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Xiaomi
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
33.0
#105
45.6
#29
Reasoning
33.8
#96
42.5
#45
Coding
19.3
#109
36.7
#21
Agents
12.7
#101
33.1
#26
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
— / M
$0.14 / M
Output price
— / M
$0.28 / M
Context window
—
1,048,576

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
MAI-Thinking-1
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Tool use
10.7#120
24.7#29
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

23 reported for MAI-Thinking-1 · 16 for MiMo-V2.6-Flash

No common benchmarks found

MAI-Thinking-1 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

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

691.0B diff

MAI-Thinking-1 has 691.0B more parameters than MiMo-V2.6-Flash, making it 223.6% larger.

Microsoft
MAI-Thinking-1
1.0Tparameters
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
309.0Bparameters
1000.0B
MAI-Thinking-1
309.0B
MiMo-V2.6-Flash

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only MiMo-V2.6-Flash specifies input context (1,048,576 tokens).

Microsoft
MAI-Thinking-1
Input- tokens
Output- 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 MAI-Thinking-1 does not.

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

MAI-Thinking-1

Text
Images
Audio
Video

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

MAI-Thinking-1 is licensed under a proprietary license, while MiMo-V2.6-Flash uses MIT.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

MAI-Thinking-1

Proprietary

Closed source

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

MAI-Thinking-1 was released on 2026-06-02, while MiMo-V2.6-Flash was released on 2026-09-22.

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 4 months newer than MAI-Thinking-1.

MAI-Thinking-1

Jun 2, 2026

3 months ago

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

Sep 22, 2026

0 days ago

3mo 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

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against MAI-Thinking-1 and MiMo-V2.6-Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

MAI-Thinking-1
✓ Preferred
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about MAI-Thinking-1 vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash.

Which is better, MAI-Thinking-1 or MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 45.6 to 33.0. MAI-Thinking-1 is made by Microsoft 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 MAI-Thinking-1 compare to MiMo-V2.6-Flash in benchmarks?

MAI-Thinking-1 scores LongFact: 98.0%, AIME 2025: 97.0%, AIME 2026: 94.5%, GraphWalks: 90.0%, AIR-Bench: 88.0%. 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%.

What are the context window sizes for MAI-Thinking-1 and MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

MAI-Thinking-1 supports an unknown number of 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 MAI-Thinking-1 and MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (33.0 vs 45.6), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes MAI-Thinking-1 and MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

MAI-Thinking-1 is developed by Microsoft and MiMo-V2.6-Flash is developed by Xiaomi.

Related comparisons