ResearchLLM Verifications Leaderboard

Data as of · 78 models, 80 questions · reviewed by Suhas Bhairav · methodology

Head to head · tested 27 Oct 2026

MiMo-V2.6-Flash vs Qwen3.8 27B: accuracy, speed and price

Similar accuracy; MiMo-V2.6-Flash costs less per question.

XiaomiMiMo-V2.6-Flash62.5% score · #36$0.00056 per question77 tok/sQwenQwen3.8 27B63.8% score · #34$0.0043 per question49 tok/s

Verdict

Built from the measurements below

  • Accuracy is too close to call: MiMo-V2.6-Flash scored 62.5% and Qwen3.8 27B 63.8% on the same 80 questions, a gap within what chance alone could produce.
  • MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 7.7× cheaper per question as billed ($0.00056 vs $0.0043), reasoning tokens included.
  • MiMo-V2.6-Flash generates text 1.6× faster: 77 tokens per second against 49.
  • MiMo-V2.6-Flash starts answering sooner: 0.4 s to the first token, against 0.5 s for Qwen3.8 27B.

Which should you choose?

Choose MiMo-V2.6-Flash for the lower cost per correct answer ($0.0009 against $0.0067), faster streaming and a quicker first token. Choose Qwen3.8 27B for more hosts to choose from on OpenRouter (21 against 10).

Accuracy gap -1.2 points (z = -0.16). A winner is called only when z is at least 1.96, the usual 95% threshold. Speed, latency and price need a 10% margin.

Head to head

Same questions, same prompt, same API

MeasureMiMo-V2.6-FlashQwen3.8 27BEdge
Verification scoreHigher is better62.5%63.8%Too close to call
Cost per questionLower is better$0.00056$0.0043MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Output speedHigher is better7749MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Time to first tokenLower is better0.4 s0.5 sMiMo-V2.6-Flash
End-to-end response timeLower is better5.4 s10.6 sMiMo-V2.6-Flash
Tokens per questionLower is better1,8501,913Similar
Context windowHigher is better1.1M1MSimilar

Side by side

Bars are scaled to the larger of the two values. The winner on each measure is marked in bold.

Every measure

MiMo-V2.6-Flash first, Qwen3.8 27B second

Verification scorehigher is better
MiMo-V2.6-Flash62.5%
Qwen3.8 27B63.8%
Cost per questionlower is better
MiMo-V2.6-Flash$0.00056
Qwen3.8 27B$0.0043
Output speedhigher is better
MiMo-V2.6-Flash77
Qwen3.8 27B49
Time to first tokenlower is better
MiMo-V2.6-Flash0.4 s
Qwen3.8 27B0.5 s
End-to-end response timelower is better
MiMo-V2.6-Flash5.4 s
Qwen3.8 27B10.6 s
Tokens per questionlower is better
MiMo-V2.6-Flash1,850
Qwen3.8 27B1,913
Context windowhigher is better
MiMo-V2.6-Flash1.1M
Qwen3.8 27B1M

Score vs. cost per question

Both models in color, every other model in grey

Most attractive quadrant0255075100$0.00001$0.0001$0.001$0.01$0.10Cost per question (USD, log) →Verification score (%) →Qwen3.8 2.4T A95BCommand AReka Flash 3Gemma 4 26B A4BGemma 4 31BQwen3.5 397B A17BHermes 4 405BMuse WonderGrok 4.7o3gpt-oss-20bMinistral 3 3B 2512Nova Micro 1.0Phi 4Granite 4.2 8BHy3GLM 5.3 FlashSolar Pro 4Trinity Large ThinkingMiniMax M3Mistral Large 4Claude Opus 5.5GPT-6.1 SolGemini 4 ArgonGPT-5.4GPT-6 Lunagpt-oss-120bLlama 4 Maverick

Specifications and pricing

From OpenRouter's catalogue, plus the leaderboard's test dates

SpecificationMiMo-V2.6-FlashQwen3.8 27B
CreatorXiaomiQwen
Released21 Sept 202614 Aug 2026
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReasoningYesYes
Inputtext, image, video, audiotext, image, video
Outputtexttext
Context window1.1M tokens1M tokens
Knowledge cutoff——
List price in / out per 1M$0.14 / $0.28$0.2 / $2.5
Blended price per 1M (3:1)$0.18$0.78
Cheapest hostGMICloud · $0.119 / $0.238Tenstorrent · $0.06 / $0.5
Hosts on OpenRouter1021
Last tested26 Oct 202626 Oct 2026

Compare any two models →

MiMo-V2.6-Flash vs Qwen3.8 27B: frequently asked questions

Is MiMo-V2.6-Flash better than Qwen3.8 27B?
On accuracy they are statistically tied: MiMo-V2.6-Flash scored 62.5% and Qwen3.8 27B 63.8% on the same 80 questions from open datasets. Similar accuracy; MiMo-V2.6-Flash costs less per question.
Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.6-Flash or Qwen3.8 27B?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper: $0.00056 per question as billed, against $0.0043. List prices: MiMo-V2.6-Flash $0.14 in / $0.28 out, Qwen3.8 27B $0.2 in / $2.5 out per million tokens.
Which is faster, MiMo-V2.6-Flash or Qwen3.8 27B?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is faster at 77 output tokens per second, against 49. Time to first token: 0.4 s for MiMo-V2.6-Flash, 0.5 s for Qwen3.8 27B.
Which has the larger context window, MiMo-V2.6-Flash or Qwen3.8 27B?
Both accept about the same amount of context: 1.1M and 1M tokens.