Skip to main content

Model comparison

Kimi K2.6 vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 24 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

Moonshot AI
56.79/100
Margin
13.4pts
winning →
70.19/100
2 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Kimi K2.6 #74 (Estimated); MiMo-V2.5-Pro #14 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Kimi K2.6 and MiMo-V2.5-Pro share 24 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 27 results are unique to Kimi K2.6; 7 to MiMo-V2.5-Pro.

Updated July 21, 2026
Shared results
24
Kimi K2.6 only
27
MiMo-V2.5-Pro only
7
Comparable categories
3 / 8

Pick MiMo-V2.5-Pro 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 24 shared benchmark results across 6 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-Pro is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 70.19 to 56.79. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

MiMo-V2.5-Pro's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 48 against 42.2. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HLE, 34.7% to 48%. Kimi K2.6 does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

MiMo-V2.5-Pro 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 scores and score margins for Kimi K2.6 and MiMo-V2.5-Pro
CategoryKimi K2.6ΔMiMo-V2.5-Pro
CodingKimi K2.664.4Margin 7.2MiMo-V2.5-Pro57.2
KnowledgeKimi K2.642.2Margin 5.8MiMo-V2.5-Pro48.0
AgenticKimi K2.673.5Margin 5.1MiMo-V2.5-Pro68.4
MathKimi K2.667.1MarginNo overlapMiMo-V2.5-ProNot measured
MultimodalKimi K2.679.8MarginNo overlapMiMo-V2.5-ProNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Kimi K2.6B · MiMo-V2.5-Pro
  1. HLE

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 34.7%B 48%
    Winner: MiMo-V2.5-ProΔ 13.3
    HLE: Kimi K2.6 scored 34.7%; MiMo-V2.5-Pro scored 48%. MiMo-V2.5-Pro wins this benchmark.
  2. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 66.7%B 68.4%
    Winner: MiMo-V2.5-ProΔ 1.7
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Kimi K2.6 scored 66.7%; MiMo-V2.5-Pro scored 68.4%. MiMo-V2.5-Pro wins this benchmark.
  3. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 58.6%B 57.2%
    Winner: Kimi K2.6Δ 1.4
    SWE-bench Pro: Kimi K2.6 scored 58.6%; MiMo-V2.5-Pro scored 57.2%. Kimi K2.6 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricKimi K2.6MiMo-V2.5-ProComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensKimi K2.6$0.95 input / $4 outputMiMo-V2.5-ProNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondKimi K2.6Not availableMiMo-V2.5-ProNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenKimi K2.6Not availableMiMo-V2.5-ProNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensKimi K2.6256KMiMo-V2.5-Pro1MMiMo-V2.5-Pro lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticKimi K2.6 wins
BenchmarkKimi K2.6MiMo-V2.5-ProResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 66.7%68.4%MiMo-V2.5-Pro 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%63.8%MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
DeepSearchQASource 92.5%Not comparable
WideResearchSource 80.8%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 30.3%29.1%Kimi K2.6 leads
τ²-bench resultsSource 95.9%94.2%Kimi K2.6 leads
GDPval-AASource 34.5%38.3%MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
GDPval-AASource 11891265MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
APEX-Agents-AASource 28.5%2.4%Kimi K2.6 leads
Gert LabsSource 56.82%62.70%MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
ResearchClawBenchSource 18.0%Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source 4.6%Not comparable
terminalBenchHardSource 43.9%43.2%Kimi K2.6 leads
τ³-bench resultsSource 72.9%Not comparable
AA BriefcaseSource 873Not comparable
AA ITBenchSource 38.2%Not comparable
aaTerminalBench21Source 65.2%Not comparable
AA Harvey LABSource 73.3%Not comparable
CodingKimi K2.6 wins
BenchmarkKimi K2.6MiMo-V2.5-ProResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 80.2%Not comparable
LiveCodeBench v6Source 89.6%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 58.6%57.2%Kimi K2.6 leads
SWE MultilingualSource 76.7%Not comparable
SciCodeSource 52.2%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 66.7%68.4%MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
Vibe Code BenchSource 37.89%Not comparable
cursorBench31Source 47.6%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 61.8%60.2%Kimi K2.6 leads
AA-SciCodeSource 53.5%50.2%Kimi K2.6 leads
Reasoning
BenchmarkKimi K2.6MiMo-V2.5-ProResult
AA-LCRSource 69.7%73.3%MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
CritPtSource 8.0%4.0%Kimi K2.6 leads
KnowledgeMiMo-V2.5-Pro wins
BenchmarkKimi K2.6MiMo-V2.5-ProResult
GPQASource 90.5%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 90.5%Not comparable
HLESource 34.7%48%MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 44.2%42.2%Kimi K2.6 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 91.1%86.6%Kimi K2.6 leads
AA-HLESource 35.9%33.8%Kimi K2.6 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 6.4%3.6%Kimi K2.6 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 32.8%22.6%Kimi K2.6 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 39.3%24.5%MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
HLE w/o toolsSource 34%Not comparable
AA Openness IndexSource 38.9%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkKimi K2.6MiMo-V2.5-ProResult
AIME26Source 96.4%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source 92.7%Not comparable
MMAnswerBenchSource 86.0%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 38.966%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 14.580%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkKimi K2.6MiMo-V2.5-ProResult
MMMU-ProSource 79.4%Not comparable
MMMU-Pro w/ PythonSource 80.1%Not comparable
CharXivSource 80.4%Not comparable
MathVisionSource 87.4%Not comparable
V*Source 96.9%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 79.4%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 13061298Kimi K2.6 leads
Inst. Following
BenchmarkKimi K2.6MiMo-V2.5-ProResult
AA-IFBenchSource 76.0%79.9%MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
Frequently Asked Questions (4)

Which is better, Kimi K2.6 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 70.19 to 56.79. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HLE, where the scores are 34.7% and 48%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Kimi K2.6 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 48 versus 42.2. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, Kimi K2.6 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?

Kimi K2.6 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 64.4 versus 57.2. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Kimi K2.6 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?

Kimi K2.6 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 73.5 versus 68.4. Inside this category, GDPval-AA 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.

Kimi K2.6
API / mo$3,713
Self-host / mo$18,221
Break-even326M/day
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
API / mo$0
Self-host / moNot listed
Break-even
Proprietary model — self-hosting not applicable.
Model the full break-even

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 21, 2026

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.