Head-to-head comparison across 3benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
86
Qwen3.6 Plus
73
Verified leaderboard positions: MiMo-V2.5-Pro unranked · Qwen3.6 Plus #14
Pick MiMo-V2.5-Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.6 Plus only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority.
Agentic
+6.8 difference
Coding
+7.6 difference
Knowledge
+18.0 difference
MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Qwen3.6 Plus
$null / $null
$null / $null
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1M
1M
Pick MiMo-V2.5-Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.6 Plus only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority.
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 86 to 73. 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 agentic, where it averages 68.4 against 61.6. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HLE, 48% to 28.8%. Qwen3.6 Plus does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 86 to 73. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HLE, where the scores are 48% and 28.8%.
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 66 versus 48. Inside this category, HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Qwen3.6 Plus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 64.8 versus 57.2. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
MiMo-V2.5-Pro has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 68.4 versus 61.6. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.