Head to head

Any two models from the board, on the same tasks and graders.

Side A

Profile

Hostedinclusionai195 tok/sopenrouter

Side B

Profile

Hostedxiaomi69 tok/sopenrouter

Overall

Wins 1 task, 12 test cases

Overall

Wins 7 tasks, 64 test cases

MiMo-V2.6-Flash leads by 20 points and wins 7 of 9 tasks.

Learn to build evals like this in the AI Engineering Academy

Task by task

MiMo-V2.6-Flash wins 7 of 9

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 TinyBMiMo-V2.6-FlashLead

Overall

+20

Tool Calling

Right tool, right args, right sequence?

+29

Structured Output

Valid JSON matching the schema, correct fields?

+27

RAG / Retrieval QA

A correct answer grounded in the given context, with nothing made up?

+29

Context Recall

Finds the one fact buried in a long context?

100

+44

Coding

Working code that passes hidden unit tests?

+31

Reasoning & Math

Multi-step math and logic with the exact right answer?

+14

Instruction Following

Obeys format, length, and content constraints to the letter?

+10

Classification

Correct label from a fixed set?

Even

Summarization

Compact summary that keeps the facts and invents none?

+23

The race

No lead changes

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.

Ling 3.0 TinyMiMo-V2.6-Flash

Every test case

238 test cases

One square per test case, in suite order. A square takes the color of the model that scored higher on it.

Tool Calling114

Structured Output08

RAG / Retrieval QA08

Context Recall08

Coding09

Reasoning & Math40

Instruction Following14

Classification33

Summarization310

12 won by Ling 3.0 Tiny64 won by MiMo-V2.6-Flash162 tied

Where it breaks

238 shared test cases

On the impossible tier, Ling 3.0 Tiny passes 8% of test cases and MiMo-V2.6-Flash passes 30%.

TierALing 3.0 TinyBMiMo-V2.6-FlashLead

Baseline

36 test cases

56%

53%

+3 pts

Hard

69 test cases

19%

45%

+26 pts

Impossible

133 test cases

30%

+22 pts

Tiers come from the suite. Baseline is fair, hard is adversarial, and impossible is built so that nothing solves it. Each number is the share of test cases the model fully passed.

Thinking spend

MiMo-V2.6-Flash spends 1.3× as many thinking tokens per test case.

Ling 3.0 Tiny

4.4Ktokens

Per test case, 56% of it thinking

MiMo-V2.6-Flash

3.4Ktokens

Per test case, 95% of it thinking

TaskALing 3.0 TinyBMiMo-V2.6-Flash

Tool Calling

4.8K45% thinking

3.5K85% thinking

Structured Output

3.2K45% thinking

2.6K99% thinking

RAG / Retrieval QA

3.9K59% thinking

2.2K91% thinking

Context Recall

1.8K66% thinking

23195% thinking

Coding

8.2K79% thinking

7.2K95% thinking

Reasoning & Math

6.7K49% thinking

6.3K98% thinking

Instruction Following

3.8K51% thinking

2.9K99% thinking

Classification

3.4K46% thinking

2.9K98% thinking

Summarization

2.6K54% thinking

1.5K98% thinking

Average output tokens per test case, and how much of it was thinking.

What you'd run

The build behind each score. The better value in each row is highlighted.

SpecALing 3.0 TinyBMiMo-V2.6-Flash

Speed

195 tok/s

69 tok/s

Memory

—

Context

262.1K

Cost per run

$0.4321

Quantization

—

Harness

openrouter

Faster, smaller, cheaper and more context count as better. Quantization and harness only describe the builds.