Model comparison
Kimi K2.6 vs MiMo-V2.5
Head-to-head evidence from 9 shared benchmark results across 3 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Kimi K2.6 #74 (Estimated); MiMo-V2.5 #62 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Kimi K2.6 and MiMo-V2.5 share 9 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 42 results are unique to Kimi K2.6; 2 to MiMo-V2.5.
Updated July 21, 2026- Shared results
- 9
- Kimi K2.6 only
- 42
- MiMo-V2.5 only
- 2
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Pick MiMo-V2.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Kimi K2.6 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 9 shared benchmark results across 3 evidence categories; 3 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
MiMo-V2.5 has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 58.62 versus 56.79. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
MiMo-V2.5 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Kimi K2.6.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Kimi K2.6 | Δ | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Kimi K2.664.4 | Margin← 8.3 | MiMo-V2.556.1 |
| Agentic | Kimi K2.673.5 | Margin← 7.7 | MiMo-V2.565.8 |
| Multimodal | Kimi K2.679.8 | Margin← 0.8 | MiMo-V2.579.0 |
| Knowledge | Kimi K2.642.2 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2.5Not measured |
| Math | Kimi K2.667.1 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2.5Not measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 58.6%B 56.1%Winner: Kimi K2.6Δ 2.5SWE-bench Pro: Kimi K2.6 scored 58.6%; MiMo-V2.5 scored 56.1%. Kimi K2.6 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMMU-Pro
MultimodalA 79.4%B 77.9%Winner: Kimi K2.6Δ 1.5MMMU-Pro: Kimi K2.6 scored 79.4%; MiMo-V2.5 scored 77.9%. Kimi K2.6 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 66.7%B 65.8%Winner: Kimi K2.6Δ 0.9Terminal-Bench 2.0: Kimi K2.6 scored 66.7%; MiMo-V2.5 scored 65.8%. Kimi K2.6 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
CharXiv
MultimodalA 80.4%B 81%Winner: MiMo-V2.5Δ 0.6CharXiv: Kimi K2.6 scored 80.4%; MiMo-V2.5 scored 81%. MiMo-V2.5 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Kimi K2.6 | MiMo-V2.5 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Kimi K2.6$0.95 input / $4 output | MiMo-V2.5Not available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Kimi K2.6Not available | MiMo-V2.5Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Kimi K2.6Not available | MiMo-V2.5Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Kimi K2.6256K | MiMo-V2.51M | MiMo-V2.5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticKimi K2.6 wins18 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | MiMo-V2.5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 66.7% | 65.8% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| BrowseCompSource | 83.2% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 73.1% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 50% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 55.9% | — | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | 62.3% | 62.3% | Tie |
| DeepSearchQASource | 92.5% | — | Not comparable |
| WideResearchSource | 80.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 30.3% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 95.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 34.5% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1189 | — | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | 28.5% | — | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | 56.82% | 46.89% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | 18.0% | 16.9% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | 4.6% | — | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | 43.9% | — | Not comparable |
| MM-ClawBenchSource | — | 23.8% | Not comparable |
CodingKimi K2.6 wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | MiMo-V2.5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 80.2% | — | Not comparable |
| LiveCodeBench v6Source | 89.6% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 58.6% | 56.1% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 76.7% | — | Not comparable |
| SciCodeSource | 52.2% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 66.7% | 65.8% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 37.89% | — | Not comparable |
| cursorBench31Source | 47.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 61.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 53.5% | — | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | MiMo-V2.5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 90.5% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 90.5% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 34.7% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 44.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 91.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 35.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 6.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 32.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 39.3% | — | Not comparable |
Math5 benchmarks
MultimodalKimi K2.6 wins8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | MiMo-V2.5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | 79.4% | 77.9% | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| MMMU-Pro w/ PythonSource | 80.1% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | 80.4% | 81% | MiMo-V2.5 leads |
| MathVisionSource | 87.4% | — | Not comparable |
| V*Source | 96.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 79.4% | — | Not comparable |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1306 | 1291 | Kimi K2.6 leads |
| Video-MME (with subtitle)Source | — | 87.7% | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Kimi K2.6 | MiMo-V2.5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 76.0% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, Kimi K2.6 or MiMo-V2.5?
MiMo-V2.5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 58.62 to 56.79. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Pro, where the scores are 58.6% and 56.1%.
Which is better for coding, Kimi K2.6 or MiMo-V2.5?
Kimi K2.6 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 64.4 versus 56.1. Inside this category, SWE-bench Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Kimi K2.6 or MiMo-V2.5?
Kimi K2.6 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 73.5 versus 65.8. Inside this category, Gert Labs is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Kimi K2.6 or MiMo-V2.5?
Kimi K2.6 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 79.8 versus 79. Inside this category, Design Arena Website is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Self-host vs API cost
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
Related Comparisons
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.