Roboflow

Gemini 3.5 Flash vs MiMo V2.6 Pro

Compare Gemini 3.5 Flash and MiMo V2.6 Pro side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Open Prompt, Image Captioning, OCR, Classification, and Object Detection.

Compare Gemini 3.5 Flash vs MiMo V2.6 Pro live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
GoogleGemini 3.5 Flash
Run to compare this model.
MiMo V2.6 Pro
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Gemini 3.5 Flash vs MiMo V2.6 Pro on Vision Evals

Gemini 3.5 Flash scores higher on all five Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Reasoning, where Gemini 3.5 Flash leads 82.1% to 35.1%.

Overall, Gemini 3.5 Flash averages 81.8% (#4 of 63) against 50.3% (#54 of 63) for MiMo V2.6 Pro.

MiMo V2.6 Pro is both cheaper ($0.0011 vs $0.012 per sample) and faster (9.5s vs 11.5s per sample).

Gemini 3.5 FlashMiMo V2.6 Pro

Gemini 3.5 Flash vs MiMo V2.6 Pro Comparison Table

Evals updated October 13, 2026Pricing updated October 19, 2026

PropertyGemini 3.5 FlashMiMo V2.6 Pro
OrganizationGoogleXiaomi
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateMay 2026Sep 2026
Context Window1.0M1.0M
ParametersUnknown1.02T total, 42B active
LicenseProprietaryMIT
Commercial usecommercial use per vendor termsfree for commercial use
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$1.50$0.435
Output $/1M$9.00$0.870
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
ClassificationDemoDemo
Document Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
Image TaggingSupportedSupported
Multi-Label ClassificationSupportedSupported
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision LanguageSupportedSupported
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Model Features
Foundation VisionSupportedSupported
LLMs with Vision CapabilitiesSupportedSupported
Multimodal VisionSupportedSupported
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
81.8%
50.3%
Avg cost / sample$0.012$0.0011
Avg speed / sample11.52s9.45s
By task
Object Detection (low)
70.6%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 68.7 to 72.6
$0.016
42.0%
±1.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 40.9 to 43.1
$0.0014
Object Detection (high)
69.8%
±1.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 67.5 to 71.1
$0.021
46.7%
±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 45.7 to 47.3
$0.0030
Counting (low)
80.6%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 79.7 to 81.1
$0.0075
50.0%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 48.6 to 52.7
$0.0005
Counting (high)
82.4%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.4 to 82.4
$0.017
59.0%
±5.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 52.7 to 63.5
$0.0016
Identification (low)
99.0%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 100.0
$0.0040
76.0%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.0 to 78.1
$0.0004
Identification (high)
97.9%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 100.0
$0.0068
78.1%
±4.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.9 to 81.3
$0.0012
OCR (low)
76.7%
$0.013
48.6%
$0.0012
by category
Single value
71.7%
Transcription
90.0%
Structured JSON
86.8%
Text localization
56.2%
Single value
37.0%
Transcription
68.2%
Structured JSON
67.7%
Text localization
18.7%
OCR (high)
75.5%
$0.031
49.9%
$0.0034
by category
Single value
69.6%
Transcription
85.4%
Structured JSON
88.1%
Text localization
53.3%
Single value
40.4%
Transcription
59.9%
Structured JSON
70.2%
Text localization
16.8%
Reasoning (low)
82.1%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.1 to 84.1
$0.0082
35.1%
±2.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 32.5 to 37.8
$0.0005
Reasoning (high)
81.0%
±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 79.5 to 82.8
$0.018
55.9%
±2.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.3 to 58.9
$0.0026

Gemini 3.5 Flash vs MiMo V2.6 Pro: Overview

Gemini 3.5 Flash

Gemini 3.5 Flash is a multimodal language model developed by Google DeepMind and released at Google I/O 2026. It is built on the Gemini 3 Flash reasoning foundation and introduces configurable thinking levels (minimal, low, medium, and high) that allow developers to tune the depth of internal reasoning before a response is generated. The model accepts text, image, video, audio, and PDF inputs and produces text output, with a 1 million token context window and up to 65,000 output tokens per request. It is natively multimodal, processing visual inputs alongside text to support tasks such as image captioning, classification, optical character recognition, object detection, and visual grounding, where the model references specific regions within an image or video frame.

Its vision capabilities extend to interpreting UI screenshots, diagrams, charts, and real-world scenes, as well as understanding video and live frame sequences for activity and scene recognition. The model supports combined tool use, including Google Search, URL context, code execution, and custom functions, within a single request, and it uses reasoning context from previous turns when thought signatures are present in the conversation history, enabling persistent multi-turn reasoning chains. Gemini 3.5 Flash carries a knowledge cutoff of January 2026 and is available via the Gemini API, Google AI Studio, Google Antigravity, and the Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform.

MiMo V2.6 Pro

MiMo V2.6 Pro is the flagship omni-modal foundation model in Xiaomi's MiMo V2.6 series, released as open weights alongside a Flash variant and a 9B distillation of Qwen3.5. It uses a sparse mixture-of-experts transformer with 1.02 trillion total parameters and roughly 42 billion activated per token, paired with a hybrid attention design that interleaves sliding-window and global attention layers to support a context window of about one million tokens. Dedicated encoders handle non-text inputs, including a vision encoder of roughly 681 million parameters and an audio tokenizer stack, so the model accepts text, images, video, and audio and returns text.

Post-training centers on large-scale reinforcement learning across thousands of interactive environments, combined with agentic grading, self-correction cold start, and a multi-prefix multi-teacher on-policy distillation stage that extends behavior to tasks that are hard to verify automatically. The resulting model targets long-horizon agentic work such as software engineering, terminal and computer-use operation, tool calling, cybersecurity analysis, and visual coding, and it reports gains over the prior MiMo generation on SWE-bench Verified, Terminal Bench, and internal visual coding and cyber benchmarks.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Gemini 3.5 Flash performed better. It scores higher on all five vision tasks and averages 81.8% (#4 of 63) against 50.3% (#54 of 63) for MiMo V2.6 Pro. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

Yes. On the Vision Evals Reasoning benchmark at low effort, Gemini 3.5 Flash leads with 82.1% against 35.1%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

MiMo V2.6 Pro is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0011 per sample against $0.012. Gemini 3.5 Flash is priced at $1.50 per 1M input tokens and $9.00 per 1M output; MiMo V2.6 Pro is priced at $0.43 per 1M input tokens and $0.87 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

MiMo V2.6 Pro is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 9.5s per inference against 11.5s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.

Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for open prompts and image captioning in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.