MiMo-V2.6-Flash vs Mistral Large 4

Overall
45
vs
Overall
28

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is clearly better. It wins 47 of the 66 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. Both models spend about the same on thinking per test case.

Thinking tokensAnswer tokens
TaskAB
Overall
451m 21s
4.2K, 92% thinking6.2K, 72% thinking
281m 56s
Agents
381m 19s
2.2K, 86% thinking795, no thinking
1126.1s
Structured Extraction
6238.0s
2.6K, 91% thinking288, no thinking
153.78s
Coding
242m 40s
9.9K, 97% thinking9.3K, 37% thinking
332m 48s
Grounded Answers
6242.1s
2.6K, 89% thinking8.1K, 89% thinking
382m 45s
Instruction Following
641m 2s
4.8K, 90% thinking12.9K, 84% thinking
693m 47s
Business Logic
4356.4s
4.4K, 96% thinking8.8K, 77% thinking
242m 40s
Security & permissions
662m 6s
3.8K, 88% thinking3.7K, 83% thinking
331m 9s
Diagnosis & investigation
01m 33s
1.5K, 83% thinking4.4K, 85% thinking
01m 19s

What you'd run

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

SpecAB
Speed
66 tok/s (better)
56 tok/s
Machine
Hosted
Hosted
Memory at 32K
—
—
Context
1.1M (better)
512K
Cost per run
$0.33 (better)
$2.67
Cost per case
$0.0021 (better)
$0.017
Time per case
1m 21s (better)
1m 56s
Quantization
BF16
—
Harness
openrouter
openrouter

The race

No lead changes

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

MiMo-V2.6-FlashMistral Large 4
025507510050100150Perfect run4528

Every test case

153 test cases

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

47 won by MiMo-V2.6-Flash19 won by Mistral Large 487 tied