Beam 1.0 501B A23B vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro

Overall
57
vs
Overall
48

Too close to call. Beam 1.0 501B A23B wins 33 of the 57 test cases where they differ.

Learn to build evals like this in the AI Engineering Academy

Task by task

A score turns orange only when that model wins clearly more of the task's test cases. Under each score, the average time per test case on the machine it ran on. MiMo-V2.6-Pro spends 1.5× as many thinking tokens per test case.

Thinking tokensAnswer tokens
TaskAB
Overall
5717.2s
4K, 87% thinking5.9K, 89% thinking
482m 13s
Agents
5521.8s
4.8K, 90% thinking8.7K, 84% thinking
474m 48s
Structured Extraction
819.98s
3.4K, 91% thinking3.4K, 87% thinking
601m 26s
Coding
4819.9s
4.5K, 70% thinking10.7K, 95% thinking
242m 58s
Grounded Answers
6911.6s
2.7K, 88% thinking3.2K, 89% thinking
621m 9s
Instruction Following
7820.9s
5.6K, 90% thinking4.5K, 86% thinking
591m 23s
Business Logic
5714.0s
4.2K, 95% thinking7.1K, 92% thinking
571m 52s
Security & permissions
5120.6s
3.2K, 88% thinking3.6K, 86% thinking
711m 41s
Diagnosis & investigation
1724.3s
3.1K, 90% thinking6.2K, 86% thinking
02m 54s

What you'd run

The build behind each score. Orange marks the faster, smaller, cheaper or longer-context side.

SpecAB
Speed
274 tok/s (better)
55 tok/s
Machine
Hosted
Hosted
Memory at 32K
—
—
Context
1M
1.1M (better)
Cost per run
$0.83 (better)
$1.80
Cost per case
$0.0054 (better)
$0.012
Time per case
17.2s (better)
2m 13s
Quantization
FP8
BF16
Harness
openrouter
openrouter

The race

1 lead change

Each model's running score as the test cases go by. The dashed line is a perfect run.

Beam 1.0 501B A23BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
025507510050100150Perfect run5748

Every test case

153 test cases

Each square is one test case, colored by the model that scored higher.

33 won by Beam 1.0 501B A23B24 won by MiMo-V2.6-Pro96 tied