Head to head
Any two models from the board, on the same tasks and graders.
MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads by 2 points and wins 6 of 9 tasks.
Task by task
Average score on each task, best build on each side. The higher score is highlighted. Hover a score for the test cases behind it.
TaskALing-3.0 flashBMiMo-V2.6-FlashLead
Overall
39
41
Tool Calling
67
66
Structured Output
37
47
RAG / Retrieval QA
30
33
Context Recall
89
100
Coding
11
31
Reasoning & Math
32
11
Instruction Following
7
14
Classification
45
17
Summarization
34
50
The race
Score piled up over the 238 test cases both models ran, as a share of the suite's maximum. The dashed line is a perfect run.
Every test case
One square per test case, in suite order. A square takes the color of the model that scored higher on it.
Tool Calling
Structured Output
RAG / Retrieval QA
Context Recall
Coding
Reasoning & Math
Instruction Following
Classification
Summarization
Where it breaks
On the impossible tier, Ling-3.0 flash passes 20% of test cases and MiMo-V2.6-Flash passes 30%.
TierALing-3.0 flashBMiMo-V2.6-FlashLead
Baseline
75
53
Hard
46
45
Impossible
20
30
Thinking spend
MiMo-V2.6-Flash spends 1.4× as many thinking tokens per test case.
4.1Ktokens
Per test case, 55% of it thinking
3.4Ktokens
Per test case, 95% of it thinking
TaskALing-3.0 flashBMiMo-V2.6-Flash
Tool Calling
6.7K40% thinking
3.5K85% thinking
Structured Output
3K46% thinking
2.6K99% thinking
RAG / Retrieval QA
3.3K54% thinking
2.2K91% thinking
Context Recall
87459% thinking
23195% thinking
Coding
8K79% thinking
7.2K95% thinking
Reasoning & Math
6.2K52% thinking
6.3K98% thinking
Instruction Following
3.2K54% thinking
2.9K99% thinking
Classification
2.8K50% thinking
2.9K98% thinking
Summarization
2K49% thinking
1.5K98% thinking
What you'd run
The build behind each score. The better value in each row is highlighted.
SpecALing-3.0 flashBMiMo-V2.6-Flash
Speed
264 tok/s (better)
69 tok/s
Memory
—
—
Context
262.1K
1M (better)
Cost per run
$0 (better)
$0.4321
Quantization
—
—
Harness
openrouter
openrouter