Mercury 2.5 vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Which is better for the money: Mercury 2.5 by Inception 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 Mercury 2.5: 208.1% more intelligence, 49.8% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 1028.2% slower end-to-end.
| Metric | Mercury 2.5 | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 12.3 | 37.9 | +208.1% MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 3.1× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $218.11 | $109.55 | −49.8% MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 49.8% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 4.39s | 49.53s | +1028.2% MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 1028.2% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.25 / $0.75 | $0.14 / $0.28 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Mercury 2.5 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
Mercury 2.5MiMo-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/mercury-2-5/mimo-v2-6-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/mercury-2-5/mimo-v2-6-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill