The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

MiMo-V2.6-Pro vs Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507

MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads the LLM Stats Score 40.6 to 28.1.

Xiaomi · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads the overall LLM Stats Score 40.6 to 28.1, ranking #57 overall.

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

Choose MiMo-V2.6-Pro

  • overall performance matters — it scores 40.6 and ranks #57 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes agents — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507

  • you want predictable pricing at $0.30/M input and $3.00/M output

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Core performance indexes
40.6
#57
28.1
#138
29.9
#38
11.4
#111
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
Input price
— / M
$0.30 / M
Output price
— / M
$3.00 / M
Context window
262,144

Individual benchmarks

3 reported for MiMo-V2.6-Pro · 25 for Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507

No common benchmarks found

MiMo-V2.6-Pro and Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507don'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

785.0B diff

MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 785.0B more parameters than Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507, making it 334.0% larger.

Xiaomi
MiMo-V2.6-Pro
1.0Tparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507
235.0Bparameters
1020.0B
MiMo-V2.6-Pro
235.0B
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 specifies input context (262,144 tokens). Only Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 specifies output context (131,072 tokens).

Xiaomi
MiMo-V2.6-Pro
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507
Input262,144 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Mon Sep 21 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

MiMo-V2.6-Pro supports multimodal inputs, whereas Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 does not.

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

MiMo-V2.6-Pro

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is licensed under MIT, while Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 uses Apache 2.0.

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

MiMo-V2.6-Pro

MIT

Open weights

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

MiMo-V2.6-Pro was released on 2026-09-22, while Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 was released on 2025-07-25.

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is 14 months newer than Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507.

MiMo-V2.6-Pro

Sep 22, 2026

-1 days ago

1.2yr newer
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507

Jul 25, 2025

1.2 years 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-Pro and Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

MiMo-V2.6-Pro
✓ Preferred
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about MiMo-V2.6-Pro vs Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507.

Which is better, MiMo-V2.6-Pro or Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads the LLM Stats Score 40.6 to 28.1. MiMo-V2.6-Pro is made by Xiaomi and Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does MiMo-V2.6-Pro compare to Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 in benchmarks?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores DeepSWE 1.1: 71.9%, MiMo Coding Bench: 63.2%, Program Bench: 26.5%. Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 scores MMLU-Redux: 93.8%, AIME 2025: 92.3%, WritingBench: 88.3%, IFEval: 87.8%, Creative Writing v3: 86.1%.

What are the context window sizes for MiMo-V2.6-Pro and Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro supports an unknown number of tokens and Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 supports 262K 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-Pro and Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (40.6 vs 28.1), 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-Pro and Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is developed by Xiaomi and Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.