Model Comparison

Qwen3.6 Plus vs MiMo-V2.5Which is better in 2026?

Qwen3.6 Plus has a slight edge in benchmark performance. MiMo-V2.5 is 5.4x cheaper per token.

Verdict: Qwen3.6 Plus vs MiMo-V2.5 — which is better?

Qwen3.6 Plus (by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team) and MiMo-V2.5 (by Xiaomi) are two of the AI models people compare most. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.

Qwen3.6 Plus outperforms in 4 benchmarks (CharXiv-R, Finance Agent v2, MMMU-Pro, SWE-Bench Pro), while MiMo-V2.5 is better at 3 benchmarks (Claw-Eval, Terminal-Bench 2.0, Video-MME). Qwen3.6 Plus has a slight edge in benchmark performance.

On price, MiMo-V2.5 is roughly 5.4x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

MiMo-V2.5 also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Choose Qwen3.6 Plus if…

  • you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 4 of 7 shared benchmarks

Choose MiMo-V2.5 if…

  • cost matters — it's about 5.4x 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 Apr 2026
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

7 benchmarks

Qwen3.6 Plus outperforms in 4 benchmarks (CharXiv-R, Finance Agent v2, MMMU-Pro, SWE-Bench Pro), while MiMo-V2.5 is better at 3 benchmarks (Claw-Eval, Terminal-Bench 2.0, Video-MME).

Qwen3.6 Plus has a slight edge in benchmark performance.

Fri Jul 17 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

MiMo-V2.5 costs less

For input processing, Qwen3.6 Plus ($0.50/1M tokens) is 3.0x more expensive than MiMo-V2.5 ($0.17/1M tokens).

For output processing, Qwen3.6 Plus ($3.00/1M tokens) is 8.9x more expensive than MiMo-V2.5 ($0.34/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Qwen3.6 Plus is more expensive than MiMo-V2.5.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Fri Jul 17 2026 • llm-stats.com
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.6 Plus
Input tokens$0.50
Output tokens$3.00
Best providerTogether
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2.5
Input tokens$0.17
Output tokens$0.34
Best providerNovita
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

MiMo-V2.5 accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Qwen3.6 Plus's 1,000,000 tokens. MiMo-V2.5 can generate longer responses up to 131,072 tokens, while Qwen3.6 Plus is limited to 65,536 tokens.

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.6 Plus
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output65,536 tokens
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2.5
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Fri Jul 17 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both Qwen3.6 Plus and MiMo-V2.5 support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Qwen3.6 Plus

Text
Images
Audio
Video

MiMo-V2.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Qwen3.6 Plus is licensed under a proprietary license, while MiMo-V2.5 uses MIT.

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

Qwen3.6 Plus

Proprietary

Closed source

MiMo-V2.5

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Qwen3.6 Plus was released on 2026-03-31, while MiMo-V2.5 was released on 2026-04-22.

MiMo-V2.5 is 1 month newer than Qwen3.6 Plus.

Qwen3.6 Plus

Mar 31, 2026

3 months ago

MiMo-V2.5

Apr 22, 2026

2 months ago

3w 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

Qwen3.6 Plus is available from Together. MiMo-V2.5 is available from Novita, DeepInfra.

Qwen3.6 Plus

together logo
Together
Input Price:Input: $0.50/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.00/1M

MiMo-V2.5

novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.17/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.34/1M
deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.40/1MOutput Price:Output: $2.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Qwen3.6 Plus

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Higher CharXiv-R score (81.5% vs 81.0%)
Higher Finance Agent v2 score (40.8% vs 36.7%)
Higher MMMU-Pro score (78.8% vs 77.9%)
Higher SWE-Bench Pro score (56.6% vs 56.1%)
Xiaomi
Larger context window (1,048,576 tokens)
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Has open weights
Higher Claw-Eval score (63.2% vs 58.7%)
Higher Terminal-Bench 2.0 score (65.8% vs 61.6%)
Higher Video-MME score (87.7% vs 84.2%)

Detailed Comparison

Interactive Arena

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Qwen3.6 Plus and MiMo-V2.5 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Qwen3.6 Plus
✓ Preferred
MiMo-V2.5
Open in Playground
AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.6 Plus
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2.5

FAQ

Common questions about Qwen3.6 Plus vs MiMo-V2.5.

Which is better, Qwen3.6 Plus or MiMo-V2.5?

Qwen3.6 Plus has a slight edge in benchmark performance. Qwen3.6 Plus is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team and MiMo-V2.5 is made by Xiaomi. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does Qwen3.6 Plus compare to MiMo-V2.5 in benchmarks?

Qwen3.6 Plus scores CountBench: 97.6%, V*: 96.9%, HMMT 2025: 96.7%, AIME 2026: 95.3%, HMMT25: 94.6%. MiMo-V2.5 scores HR-Bench (4k): 88.5%, Video-MME: 87.7%, OmniDocBench: 87.2%, GraphWalks: 87.0%, DailyOmni: 83.5%.

Is Qwen3.6 Plus cheaper than MiMo-V2.5?

MiMo-V2.5 is 3.0x cheaper for input tokens. Qwen3.6 Plus costs $0.50/M input and $3.00/M output via together. MiMo-V2.5 costs $0.17/M input and $0.34/M output via novita.

What are the context window sizes for Qwen3.6 Plus and MiMo-V2.5?

Qwen3.6 Plus supports 1.0M tokens and MiMo-V2.5 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 Qwen3.6 Plus and MiMo-V2.5?

Key differences include context window (1.0M vs 1.0M), input pricing ($0.50 vs $0.17/M), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Qwen3.6 Plus and MiMo-V2.5?

Qwen3.6 Plus is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team and MiMo-V2.5 is developed by Xiaomi.

Related comparisons