MiMo-V2.6-Pro vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Which is better for the money: MiMo-V2.6-Pro by Xiaomi or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next by Alibaba? 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-Pro
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 14.0% less intelligence, 75.5% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 4.7% slower end-to-end.
| Metric | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen3.8-Flash-Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 46.3 | 39.8 | −14.0% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 14.0% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $206.66 | $362.72 | +75.5% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 75.5% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 48.29s | 50.57s | +4.7% Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 4.7% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.43 / $0.87 | $0.15 / $0.47 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech, Video | Text, Image, Video |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
MiMo-V2.6-ProQwen3.8-Flash-NextToday'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/mimo-v2-6-pro/qwen3-8-flash-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/mimo-v2-6-pro/qwen3-8-flash-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill