GPT-6 Luna vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash

Overall
61
vs
Overall
45

GPT-6 Luna is clearly better. It wins 43 of the 58 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-Flash spends 2.8× as many thinking tokens per test case.

Thinking tokensAnswer tokens
TaskAB
Overall
6149.1s
1.9K, 73% thinking4.2K, 92% thinking
451m 21s
Agents
561m 18s
1.3K, 67% thinking2.2K, 86% thinking
381m 19s
Structured Extraction
9514.5s
999, 72% thinking2.6K, 91% thinking
6238.0s
Coding
732m 18s
3.6K, 60% thinking9.9K, 97% thinking
242m 40s
Grounded Answers
6715.6s
1.1K, 72% thinking2.6K, 89% thinking
6242.1s
Instruction Following
8432.3s
2K, 74% thinking4.8K, 90% thinking
641m 2s
Business Logic
3743.1s
3.2K, 93% thinking4.4K, 96% thinking
4356.4s
Security & permissions
6224.5s
1K, 68% thinking3.8K, 88% thinking
662m 6s
Diagnosis & investigation
1737.7s
1.1K, 68% thinking1.5K, 83% thinking
01m 33s

What you'd run

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

SpecAB
Speed
90 tok/s (better)
66 tok/s
Machine
Hosted
Hosted
Memory at 32K
—
—
Context
1.1M
1.1M
Cost per run
$0.10 (better)
$0.33
Cost per case
$0.00067 (better)
$0.0021
Time per case
49.1s (better)
1m 21s
Quantization
—
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.

GPT-6 LunaMiMo-V2.6-Flash
025507510050100150Perfect run6145

Every test case

153 test cases

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

43 won by GPT-6 Luna15 won by MiMo-V2.6-Flash95 tied