Model comparison
MiMo-V2.6-Flash vs Qwen3 32B
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.4 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen3 32B in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads 63.9 to 53.1.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen3 32B.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3 32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 44.4 | 38.8 |
| Released | 2026-09-22 | 2025-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 131K |
| Max output | 131K | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.14 | $0.70 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.28 | $2.80 |
| Results tracked | 13 | 26 |
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: 44.3 (#68), Qwen3 32B: 37.3 (#184)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1516 | 1358 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 40% |
| SciCode | — | 35.4% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: —, Qwen3 32B: 32.3 (#58)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 48.7% |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 29.6 (#82), Qwen3 32B: 19.6 (#233)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1481 | 1335 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 54.9% |
| CritPt | — | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| DTBench | — | 67.5% |
| LMCA | — | 17.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 138.51 |
Math Too close to call
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 37.4 (#97), Qwen3 32B: 37.9 (#89)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1477 | 1399 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 66.9% |
Knowledge MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 42.0 (#91), Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#112)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1516 | 1362 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.7% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.9% |
Multimodal Not comparable
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 40.2 (#39), Qwen3 32B: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1266 | — |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 54.6 (#41), Qwen3 32B: 45.8 (#162)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1439 | 1317 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1501 | 1357 |
| LMArena Russian | 1424 | 1311 |
| LMArena German | — | 1341 |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 77.0 (#33), Qwen3 32B: 69.1 (#174)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1463 | 1305 |
Long Context MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 44.8 (#52), Qwen3 32B: 43.7 (#83)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1465 | 1327 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 74.2% |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads
MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 63.9 (#61), Qwen3 32B: 53.1 (#158)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1459 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1408 | 1297 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1460 | 1331 |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2.6-Flash better than Qwen3 32B?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.4 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.6-Flash or Qwen3 32B?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; Qwen3 32B lists at $0.70 and $2.80.
Is MiMo-V2.6-Flash or Qwen3 32B better for coding?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.3 versus 37.3 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.6-Flash and Qwen3 32B share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.6-Flash has 13 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.