Skip to main content
AI Choice Engine

Model comparison

Qwen 3.7 Max vs Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro

Qwen against Xiaomi, compared on context, price, and verified benchmark results.

Catalog record checked September 26, 2026Individual provider fields may changeEvidence confidence: High — see receipts below

Qwen

Qwen 3.7 Max

Frontier

vs

Xiaomi

Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro

Frontier · Open weights

AI model capability comparison
SpecificationQwen 3.7 MaxXiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro
ProviderQwenXiaomi
TierFrontierFrontier
Context window1MWinner: 1.05M
Max output128KNot verifiedUnverified
Input / 1M tokens$2.50Winner: $0.435
Output / 1M tokens$7.50Winner: $0.87
WeightsClosedOpen
Parametersproprietary MoE1.02T total / 42B active (MoE)
Reasoning levelslow, high, maxNot verifiedUnverified
Modalitiestext, image, videotext, image, video, audio
LicenseNot disclosedUnverifiedMIT
API model idqwen3.7-maxmimo-v2.6-pro
ReleasedMay 20, 2026September 21, 2026
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (2026-09-26)29.5Winner: 46.3
DeepSWE 1.1 (2026-09-21)Not verifiedUnverified71.9
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (2026-09-21)Not verifiedUnverified89.9

Prices are USD per million tokens at standard rates, excluding batch and caching discounts. Bold indicates the better figure where one is objectively better. Values we could not confirm from the provider are shown as “Not verified” rather than estimated.

Benchmark receipts

Where each score comes from, and how far it can be compared across models.

  • 2026-09-26
    Artificial Analysis

    Composite index blending reasoning, knowledge, and coding evals into one 0–100 score.

    Comparable with caveatOnly same-version scores are comparable. v4.3.2 was rebaselined (the top score fell from 66 on v4.1.1 to ~58), so v4.1.1 figures must not be compared with v4.3.2 figures — check measuredAt.

  • 2026-09-21
    Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6 announcement (vendor)

    Agentic software engineering: pass@1 on real repo tasks with reported cost per completed task.

    Directly comparable

Pricing tiers

Qwen 3.7 Max: Model Studio list $2.50/$7.50 per MTok; a 50%-off promo ($1.25/$3.75) ran at launch. Closed API.

Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro: $0.435/$0.87 per MTok (cache hit $0.0036; cache writes free for a limited time) — unchanged from V2.5-Pro. UltraSpeed mode (mimo-v2.6-pro-ultraspeed) costs $4.35/$8.70. Open weights (MIT) as MiMo-V2.6-Pro-RL.

FrontierRecord checked September 26, 2026

Qwen 3.7 Max

Qwen 3.7 Max is Alibaba's previous-generation proprietary flagship with a 1M-token context.

Best for

  • API-only multimodal
  • Long-context
  • Enterprise

Watch out

Model Studio now lists it under legacy models ('no longer recommended'); succeeded by Qwen 3.8 Max. Closed weights.

FrontierOpen weightsRecord checked September 26, 2026

Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is Xiaomi's open-weight (MIT) 1.02T MoE with omni-modal input and a 1M context — the top open-weight model on the Artificial Analysis index at under $1 per million output tokens.

Best for

  • Open-weight frontier work
  • Omni-modal input
  • Cheap long-context API

Watch out

Max output is not verified; vendor benchmark claims (DeepSWE 71.9) are not yet independently reproduced.

When the cheaper one wins

Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper on output at $0.87 per million tokens against $7.50 for Qwen 3.7 Max — about 8.6×. Use the cheaper tier for classification, extraction, summarisation, and any task where the expensive model’s extra score does not change the accepted output. The expensive one only pays if your hardest task actually fails on the cheap tier. These are standard-tier API rates, excluding batch and cache discounts.

Run the model picker

Evidence confidence: High

How strong and complete the evidence behind this comparison is — not a prediction of which model is better.

  • Pricing verified on both sides — Input and output rates are verified for both models.
  • 3/5 core specs verified on both sides — Not published for at least one side: max output, reasoning levels.
  • 1 shared named benchmark with differing scores — Measured on: Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index.
  • Verified within the last 90 days — Newest catalog check was 2 days ago.
  • Both models carry source citations — Each side has at least two catalog sources on record.

Source receipts

Each catalog figure was checked against the provider or an independent second source on the date shown.

Related comparisons

Diving deeper on one model? Qwen 3.7 Max · Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro

Common questions

Qwen 3.7 Max vs Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro

Answered from the verified figures on this page rather than general guidance.

Is Qwen 3.7 Max or Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro cheaper for input?
Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper at $0.435 per million input tokens, against $2.50 for Qwen 3.7 Max — roughly 5.7× the price. Output tokens usually dominate a real bill, so weigh the output rate more heavily than the input rate. These are base rates; Qwen 3.7 Max has tiered pricing: Model Studio list $2.50/$7.50 per MTok; a 50%-off promo ($1.25/$3.75) ran at launch. Closed API. Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro has tiered pricing: $0.435/$0.87 per MTok (cache hit $0.0036; cache writes free for a limited time) — unchanged from V2.5-Pro. UltraSpeed mode (mimo-v2.6-pro-ultraspeed) costs $4.35/$8.70. Open weights (MIT) as MiMo-V2.6-Pro-RL.
Is Qwen 3.7 Max or Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro cheaper for output?
Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper at $0.87 per million output tokens, against $7.50 for Qwen 3.7 Max — roughly 8.6× the price. Output tokens usually dominate a real bill, so weigh the output rate more heavily than the input rate. These are base rates; Qwen 3.7 Max has tiered pricing: Model Studio list $2.50/$7.50 per MTok; a 50%-off promo ($1.25/$3.75) ran at launch. Closed API. Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro has tiered pricing: $0.435/$0.87 per MTok (cache hit $0.0036; cache writes free for a limited time) — unchanged from V2.5-Pro. UltraSpeed mode (mimo-v2.6-pro-ultraspeed) costs $4.35/$8.70. Open weights (MIT) as MiMo-V2.6-Pro-RL.
Which has the larger context window, Qwen 3.7 Max or Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro?
Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro accepts 1.05M tokens against 1M for Qwen 3.7 Max. This only matters if you routinely send very long documents or large codebases.
Should I use Qwen 3.7 Max or Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro?
Both sit in the frontier tier, so the choice usually comes down to price and context rather than capability. Qwen 3.7 Max suits api-only multimodal; Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro suits open-weight frontier work.
Can I self-host Qwen 3.7 Max or Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro?
Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro publishes open weights, but self-hosting and third-party provider access depend on the licence, hardware, serving support, and availability. Qwen 3.7 Max is a closed model whose supported access paths are controlled by its provider.

Next step

Choosing between them

The verified figures that separate this pair, computed from the catalog rather than restated boilerplate.

  • Input price: Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro costs $0.435 per 1M tokens versus $2.50 for Qwen 3.7 Max — a 5.7x difference at the headline tier.
  • Context: Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro takes 1.05M against 1M for Qwen 3.7 Max — only decisive if your prompts approach the smaller window.
  • Measured capability: Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index 46.3 to 29.5 (measured 2026-09-26).
  • Deployment: Xiaomi MiMo-V2.6-Pro publishes weights you can self-host; the other is API-only.
Run the model pickerEstimate stack costAll model comparisons

Choosing a harness rather than a model — Cursor, Copilot, Claude Code, Windsurf, or Lovable? Compare agentic harnesses · Latest releases.