Head-to-head comparison across 3benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
MiMo-V2.5
74
Qwen3.6-27B
72
Verified leaderboard positions: MiMo-V2.5 unranked · Qwen3.6-27B #10
Pick MiMo-V2.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.6-27B only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Agentic
+6.5 difference
Coding
+14.5 difference
Multimodal
+2.1 difference
MiMo-V2.5
Qwen3.6-27B
$0.4 / $2
$0 / $0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1M
262K
Pick MiMo-V2.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.6-27B only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
MiMo-V2.5 has the cleaner provisional overall profile here, landing at 74 versus 72. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
MiMo-V2.5's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 65.8 against 59.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 65.8% to 59.3%. Qwen3.6-27B does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
MiMo-V2.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.40 input / $2.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Qwen3.6-27B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. MiMo-V2.5 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 262K for Qwen3.6-27B.
MiMo-V2.5 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 74 to 72. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 65.8% and 59.3%.
Qwen3.6-27B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 70.6 versus 56.1. Inside this category, terminalBench2 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
MiMo-V2.5 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 65.8 versus 59.3. Inside this category, Claw-Eval is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
MiMo-V2.5 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 77.9 versus 75.8. Inside this category, CharXiv is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.