Model comparison
MiMo-V2.6-Flash vs Qwen3-30B-A3B
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 38.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen3-30B-A3B in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads 53.4 to 37.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 51.3% for MiMo-V2.6-Flash and 33.3% for Qwen3-30B-A3B.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $0.12 / $0.50 for Qwen3-30B-A3B.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 41K.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3-30B-A3B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 48.5 | 38.9 |
| Released | 2026-09-21 | 2025-04-28 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 41K |
| Max output | 131K | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.14 | $0.12 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.28 | $0.50 |
| Results tracked | 19 | 32 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 53.4 (#30), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 37.5 (#194)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 51.3% | 33.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1504 | 1416 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1637 | — |
| WeirdML | — | 29.8% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: —, Qwen3-30B-A3B: 29.8 (#82)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 41.4% |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 36.5 (#66), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 22.2 (#204)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 12% | 0.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1482 | 1398 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 54.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 8% |
| DTBench | — | 69.3% |
| LMCA | — | 22.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 139.63 |
Math MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 51.9 (#52), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 37.4 (#157)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1468 | 1394 |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 47.8% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 70.3% |
| ProofBench | 63% | — |
Knowledge Too close to call
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 42.2 (#99), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 41.8 (#105)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1501 | 1396 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 70.1% |
| Confabulations | — | 12.3% |
Multimodal Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 40.5 (#47), Qwen3-30B-A3B: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1259 | — |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 54.0 (#51), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 49.5 (#132)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1434 | 1372 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1511 | 1433 |
| LMArena French | 1475 | 1418 |
| LMArena Russian | 1409 | 1370 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1456 | 1404 |
| LMArena German | — | 1380 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1337 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1331 |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 76.8 (#35), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 72.0 (#142)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1463 | 1363 |
Long Context MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 44.8 (#57), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 31.0 (#283)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1463 | 1379 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 40.6% |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 63.1 (#67), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 55.6 (#143)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1455 | 1384 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1400 | 1317 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1451 | 1378 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 75.3% |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2.6-Flash better than Qwen3-30B-A3B?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.5 to 38.9 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.6-Flash or Qwen3-30B-A3B?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; Qwen3-30B-A3B lists at $0.12 and $0.50.
Is MiMo-V2.6-Flash or Qwen3-30B-A3B better for coding?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.4 versus 37.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 41K.
How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.6-Flash and Qwen3-30B-A3B share?
16 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.6-Flash has 19 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-30B-A3B has 32.