The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

MiMo-V2.6-Flash vs MiniCPM-SALA

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 45.7 to 14.4.

Xiaomi · OpenBMB · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 45.7 to 14.4, ranking #31 overall.

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

Choose MiMo-V2.6-Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 45.7 and ranks #31 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose MiniCPM-SALA

  • you are already invested in the OpenBMB ecosystem

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Xiaomi
MiniCPM-SALA
OpenBMB
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
45.7
#31
14.4
#242
Reasoning
43.1
#45
15.7
#227
Coding
36.3
#22
21.0
#98
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.14 / M
— / M
Output price
$0.28 / M
— / M
Context window
1,048,576
—

Individual benchmarks

16 reported for MiMo-V2.6-Flash · 24 for MiniCPM-SALA

No common benchmarks found

MiMo-V2.6-Flash and MiniCPM-SALAdon'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

299.5B diff

MiMo-V2.6-Flash has 299.5B more parameters than MiniCPM-SALA, making it 3160.5% larger.

Xiaomi
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
309.0Bparameters
OpenBMB
MiniCPM-SALA
9.5Bparameters
309.0B
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
9.5B
MiniCPM-SALA

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

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

Xiaomi
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output- tokens
OpenBMB
MiniCPM-SALA
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Wed Sep 23 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

MiMo-V2.6-Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas MiniCPM-SALA does not.

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

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

MiniCPM-SALA

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is licensed under MIT, while MiniCPM-SALA uses Apache 2.0.

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

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

MIT

Open weights

MiniCPM-SALA

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

MiMo-V2.6-Flash was released on 2026-09-22, while MiniCPM-SALA was released on 2026-02-11.

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 7 months newer than MiniCPM-SALA.

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

Sep 22, 2026

0 days ago

7mo newer
MiniCPM-SALA

Feb 11, 2026

7 months ago

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 MiMo-V2.6-Flash and MiniCPM-SALA side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

MiMo-V2.6-Flash
✓ Preferred
MiniCPM-SALA
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about MiMo-V2.6-Flash vs MiniCPM-SALA.

Which is better, MiMo-V2.6-Flash or MiniCPM-SALA?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 45.7 to 14.4. MiMo-V2.6-Flash is made by Xiaomi and MiniCPM-SALA is made by OpenBMB. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does MiMo-V2.6-Flash compare to MiniCPM-SALA in benchmarks?

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%. MiniCPM-SALA scores HumanEval: 95.1%, RULER 64k: 92.7%, RULER 128k: 89.4%, MBPP: 89.1%, RULER 512K: 87.1%.

What are the context window sizes for MiMo-V2.6-Flash and MiniCPM-SALA?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash supports 1.0M tokens and MiniCPM-SALA supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between MiMo-V2.6-Flash and MiniCPM-SALA?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (45.7 vs 14.4), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (MIT vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes MiMo-V2.6-Flash and MiniCPM-SALA?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is developed by Xiaomi and MiniCPM-SALA is developed by OpenBMB.

Related comparisons