GPT-5.6 Terra vs MiMo V2.6 Pro
Compare GPT-5.6 Terra and MiMo V2.6 Pro side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Classification, Open Prompt, Object Detection, OCR, and Image Captioning.
Compare GPT-5.6 Terra 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.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
GPT-5.6 Terra vs MiMo V2.6 Pro on Vision Evals
GPT-5.6 Terra scores higher on 4 of the six Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Reasoning, where GPT-5.6 Terra leads 60.9% to 35.1%.
Overall, GPT-5.6 Terra averages 73.8% (#21 of 59) against 62.5% (#49 of 59) for MiMo V2.6 Pro.
MiMo V2.6 Pro is cheaper ($0.0008 vs $0.0088 per sample), while GPT-5.6 Terra is faster (7.7s vs 8.5s per sample).
GPT-5.6 Terra vs MiMo V2.6 Pro Comparison Table
Evals updated September 22, 2026Pricing updated September 23, 2026
| Property | GPT-5.6 Terra | MiMo V2.6 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | OpenAI | Xiaomi |
| Category | closed | open |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Jul 2026 | Sep 2026 |
| Context Window | 1.1M | 1.0M |
| Parameters | 1.02T total, 42B active | |
| License | Proprietary | MIT |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $2.00 | $0.435 |
| Output $/1M | $12.00 | $0.870 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Chart Question Answering | ||
| Classification | Demo | Demo |
| Document Question Answering | ||
| Image Tagging | ||
| Multi-Label Classification | ||
| Object Detection | Demo | Demo |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 73.8% | 62.5% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.0088 | $0.0008 |
| Avg speed / sample | 7.74s | 8.47s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | 60.6% ±0.2, Mean of 3 runs, range 60.3 to 60.7 | 42.0% ±1.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 40.9 to 43.1 |
| Object Detection (high) | 61.3% ±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 60.8 to 61.6 | 46.7% ±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 45.7 to 47.3 |
| Counting (low) | 65.8% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 63.5 to 67.6 | 50.0% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 48.6 to 52.7 |
| Counting (high) | 62.6% ±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 59.5 to 64.9 | 59.0% ±5.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 52.7 to 63.5 |
| Identification (low) | 86.5% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 87.5 | 76.0% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.0 to 78.1 |
| Identification (high) | 86.5% ±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 90.6 | 78.1% ±4.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.9 to 81.3 |
| OCR (low) | 89.4% ±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 88.8 to 90.3 | 90.7% ±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 88.5 to 91.9 |
| OCR (high) | 89.4% ±0.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 88.8 to 90.1 | 87.5% ±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 85.3 to 90.6 |
| Data Extraction (low) | 79.7% ±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 79.4 to 80.4 | 81.1% ±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.4 to 81.4 |
| Data Extraction (high) | 80.4% ±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 79.4 to 81.4 | 80.4% ±1.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 79.4 to 82.5 |
| Reasoning (low) | 60.9% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 59.6 to 63.6 | 35.1% ±2.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 32.5 to 37.8 |
| Reasoning (high) | 65.3% ±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 64.2 to 66.2 | 55.9% ±2.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.3 to 58.9 |
GPT-5.6 Terra vs MiMo V2.6 Pro: Overview
GPT-5.6 Terra is the mid-tier reasoning model in OpenAI's GPT-5.6 family, which also includes the flagship Sol and the lightweight Luna. Introduced in a limited preview on June 26, 2026, and made broadly available on July 9, 2026, Terra accepts text and image input and produces text output, supporting vision, function calling, tool use, and agentic workflows. It is designed as a balanced option for everyday professional and production workloads — including coding assistance, document analysis, customer support, and multi-step agent tasks — where both output quality and cost efficiency matter. OpenAI positions Terra as delivering performance competitive with GPT-5.5 at approximately half the price, with a context window of around 1,050,000 tokens. On Terminal-Bench 2.1, Terra scores 84.3%, matching Claude Fable 5 on that benchmark. Under OpenAI's Preparedness Framework, Terra is rated High for cybersecurity and biological capabilities, meaning it demonstrates meaningful capability in those domains without reaching the Critical threshold.
GPT-5.6 introduces a new naming convention in which the generation number (5.6) is paired with a durable capability tier name (Sol, Terra, or Luna), allowing each tier to advance on its own schedule. Terra carries the API identifier gpt-5.6-terra and supports the same reasoning effort controls available across the family, including adjustable reasoning depth. The model includes prompt caching with explicit cache breakpoints and a 30-minute minimum cache life, with cache writes billed at 1.25x the uncached input rate and cache reads receiving a 90% discount. GPT-5.6 Terra is a proprietary, closed-weights model served through the OpenAI API, Codex, and ChatGPT.
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, GPT-5.6 Terra performed better. It scores higher on 4 of the six vision tasks and averages 73.8% (#21 of 59) against 62.5% (#49 of 59) 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, GPT-5.6 Terra leads with 60.9% 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 $0.0008 per sample against $0.0088. GPT-5.6 Terra is priced at $2.00 per 1M input tokens and $12.00 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.
GPT-5.6 Terra is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 7.7s per inference against 8.5s. 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 image classification and open prompts in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.