Model comparison
Grok 4.1 Fast vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 41.4 on the Noometry Index. Grok 4.1 Fast costs 2.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2.6-Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.1 Fast scores higher in 1 category and MiMo-V2.6-Pro in 9 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads 54.5 to 31.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 4% for Grok 4.1 Fast and 70% for MiMo-V2.6-Pro.
- Grok 4.1 Fast is cheaper at $0.20 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $0.43 / $0.87 for MiMo-V2.6-Pro.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 128K.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.1 Fast | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 41.4 | 50.3 |
| Released | 2025-06-27 | 2026-09-21 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 128K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 30K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.20 | $0.43 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.50 | $0.87 |
| Results tracked | 32 | 19 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 34.1 (#245), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 55.5 (#23)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1242 | 1629 |
| LMArena Coding | 1411 | 1534 |
| ALE-Bench | 394.93 | 1,158 |
| SciCode | — | 60.9% |
Agentic & Tool Use MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 36.3 (#39), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 37.5 (#35)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 59.5% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 69.6% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 13.1% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1171 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 1,107 | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
Grok 4.1 Fast: 43.4 (#49), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.1 (#50)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1407 | 1512 |
| SimpleBench | 56% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 87.4% | — |
| CritPt | — | 26.6% |
| DTBench | 87.7% | — |
| ForecastBench | 61 | — |
Math MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 31.9 (#221), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 54.5 (#45)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 4% | 70% |
| LMArena Math | 1408 | 1494 |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 60.9% | — |
Knowledge MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 33.1 (#207), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.5 (#92)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1399 | 1543 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 17.8% | — |
Multimodal MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 37.0 (#76), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 40.8 (#43)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1201 | 1264 |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 51.0 (#114), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 56.9 (#14)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1391 | 1474 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1441 | 1529 |
| LMArena Russian | 1387 | 1480 |
| LMArena French | 1415 | — |
| LMArena German | 1404 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1349 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1361 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1413 | — |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 72.7 (#133), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 78.2 (#12)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1376 | 1493 |
Long Context MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 42.4 (#126), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 46.0 (#27)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1390 | 1501 |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Grok 4.1 Fast: 57.2 (#131), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 66.8 (#33)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.1 Fast | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1408 | 1492 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1394 | 1468 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1389 | 1464 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1327 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.1 Fast better than MiMo-V2.6-Pro?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 41.4 on the Noometry Index. Grok 4.1 Fast costs 2.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2.6-Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.1 Fast or MiMo-V2.6-Pro?
Grok 4.1 Fast is cheaper. It lists at $0.20 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2.6-Pro lists at $0.43 and $0.87.
Is Grok 4.1 Fast or MiMo-V2.6-Pro better for coding?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 34.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.1 Fast and MiMo-V2.6-Pro share?
16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.1 Fast has 32 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 19.