$ diff mimo-v2-6-pro grok-4-6
MiMo-V2.6-Pro vs Grok 4.6
Values come from MiMo-V2.6-Pro and Grok 4.6, where each is cited to its source. This page states no benchmark result and ranks neither model — it puts two published specifications next to each other. Where a lab has not published a figure, the row says so rather than guessing.
XiaomiMiMo-V2.6-Pro
- context
- 1M
- weights
- open
- $/M in
- $0.435
- $/M out
- $0.87
- context
- 500K
- weights
- closed
- $/M in
- $2
- $/M out
- $6
What actually differs
- Context window
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro takes 1M against 500K — 2× more room in a single request.
- Input price
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro at $0.435/M against $2/M — 4.6× cheaper to feed. Standard rates: one of these labs also quotes a lower cached-input tier, which applies only when a prefix is reused — see the full spec below.
- Output price
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro at $0.87/M against $6/M — 6.9× cheaper to generate. Output dominates the bill on most agentic workloads, where the model writes far more than it reads.
- Weights
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro publishes weights (MIT (open weights)); Grok 4.6 is API-only. That decides self-hosting, air-gapped deployment and fine-tuning before any capability question does.
- Recency
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro shipped 46 days after Grok 4.6 (2026-09-22 vs 2026-08-07).
Full spec
| Attribute | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Xiaomi | xAI |
| Released | 2026-09-22 | 2026-08-07 |
| Context window | 1M tokens | 500,000 tokens |
| Pricing | no vendor list price — weights are MIT and self-hostable; routed providers reported at $0.435/M input · $0.87/M output | $2/M input · $6/M output; a request reaching 200K tokens re-prices in full at $4.00/M input · $1.00/M cached input · $12.00/M output |
| License | MIT (open weights) | proprietary |
| Availability | Hugging Face as `XiaomiMiMo/MiMo-V2.6-Pro-RL`; hosted via third-party routers | API |