Apodex 1.1 vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Which is better for the money: Apodex 1.1 by Apodex or MiMo-V2.6-Flash by Xiaomi? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick MiMo-V2.6-Flash
MiMo-V2.6-Flash vs Apodex 1.1: 43.6% more intelligence, 88.3% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and end-to-end time not fully reported.
| Metric | Apodex 1.1 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 26.4 | 37.9 | +43.6% MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 43.6% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $939.06 | $109.55 | −88.3% MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 88.3% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | Not reported | 49.53s | — not comparable |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $3.00 | $0.14 / $0.28 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Apodex 1.1 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
Apodex 1.1MiMo-V2.6-FlashToday's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/apodex-1-1/mimo-v2-6-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/apodex-1-1/mimo-v2-6-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill