The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

MiMo-V2.6-Flash vs Sarvam-105B

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 45.6 to 25.7.

Xiaomi · Sarvam AI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 45.6 to 25.7, ranking #29 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 45.6 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

Choose Sarvam-105B

  • you are already invested in the Sarvam AI ecosystem

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Xiaomi
Sarvam-105B
Sarvam AI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
45.6
#29
25.7
#157
Reasoning
42.5
#45
26.2
#151
Coding
36.7
#21
-1.6
#251
Agents
33.1
#26
5.5
#148
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 · 14 for Sarvam-105B

No common benchmarks found

MiMo-V2.6-Flash and Sarvam-105Bdon'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

204.0B diff

MiMo-V2.6-Flash has 204.0B more parameters than Sarvam-105B, making it 194.3% larger.

Xiaomi
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
309.0Bparameters
Sarvam AI
Sarvam-105B
105.0Bparameters
309.0B
MiMo-V2.6-Flash
105.0B
Sarvam-105B

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
Sarvam AI
Sarvam-105B
Input- 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 Sarvam-105B 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

Sarvam-105B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is licensed under MIT, while Sarvam-105B 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

Sarvam-105B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

MiMo-V2.6-Flash was released on 2026-09-22, while Sarvam-105B was released on 2026-03-06.

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 7 months newer than Sarvam-105B.

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

Sep 22, 2026

0 days ago

6mo newer
Sarvam-105B

Mar 6, 2026

6 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 Sarvam-105B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

MiMo-V2.6-Flash
✓ Preferred
Sarvam-105B
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about MiMo-V2.6-Flash vs Sarvam-105B.

Which is better, MiMo-V2.6-Flash or Sarvam-105B?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 45.6 to 25.7. MiMo-V2.6-Flash is made by Xiaomi and Sarvam-105B is made by Sarvam AI. 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 Sarvam-105B 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%. Sarvam-105B scores MATH-500: 98.6%, AIME 2025: 96.7%, MMLU: 90.6%, HMMT 2025: 85.8%, HMMT25: 85.8%.

What are the context window sizes for MiMo-V2.6-Flash and Sarvam-105B?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash supports 1.0M tokens and Sarvam-105B 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 Sarvam-105B?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (45.6 vs 25.7), 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 Sarvam-105B?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is developed by Xiaomi and Sarvam-105B is developed by Sarvam AI.

Related comparisons