Grok 4.7 (Low) vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Which is better for the money: Grok 4.7 (Low) by SpaceXAI or MiMo-V2.6-Flash by Xiaomi? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Grok 4.7 (Low) scores 4.3 points higher (42.2 vs 37.9) but costs 15× as much to run the benchmark ($1631 vs $110; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Grok 4.7 (Low) when you need intelligence above 37.9, and MiMo-V2.6-Flash when 37.9 is enough.
| Metric | Grok 4.7 (Low) | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 42.2 | 37.9 | −10.2% MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 10.2% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,630.69 | $109.55 | −93.3% MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 93.3% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 12.39s | 49.26s | +297.6% MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 297.6% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $6.00 | $0.14 / $0.28 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
MiMo-V2.6-Flash vs Grok 4.7 (Low): 10.2% less intelligence, 93.3% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 297.6% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Grok 4.7 (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
Grok 4.7 (Low)MiMo-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/grok-4-7-low/mimo-v2-6-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/grok-4-7-low/mimo-v2-6-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill