Roboflow

Grok 4.6 vs MiMo V2.6 Pro

Compare Grok 4.6 and MiMo V2.6 Pro side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, Open Prompt, Classification, OCR, and Object Detection.

Compare Grok 4.6 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
GrokGrok 4.6
Run to compare this model.
MiMo V2.6 Pro
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Grok 4.6 vs MiMo V2.6 Pro on Vision Evals

Grok 4.6 scores higher on 4 of the five Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Reasoning, where Grok 4.6 leads 61.1% to 35.1%.

Overall, Grok 4.6 averages 59.1% (#36 of 63) against 50.3% (#54 of 63) for MiMo V2.6 Pro.

MiMo V2.6 Pro is both cheaper ($0.0011 vs $0.011 per sample) and faster (9.5s vs 19.3s per sample).

Grok 4.6MiMo V2.6 Pro

Grok 4.6 vs MiMo V2.6 Pro Comparison Table

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

PropertyGrok 4.6MiMo V2.6 Pro
OrganizationSpaceXAIXiaomi
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateAug 2026Sep 2026
Context Window500K1.0M
ParametersUnknown1.02T total, 42B active
LicenseProprietaryMIT
Commercial usecommercial use per vendor termsfree for commercial use
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$2.00$0.435
Output $/1M$6.00$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
59.1%
50.3%
Avg cost / sample$0.011$0.0011
Avg speed / sample19.32s9.45s
By task
Object Detection (low)
23.8%
±2.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 20.2 to 25.9
$0.013
42.0%
±1.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 40.9 to 43.1
$0.0014
Object Detection (high)
24.0%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 23.1 to 25.1
$0.041
46.7%
±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 45.7 to 47.3
$0.0030
Counting (low)
65.8%
±4.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 62.2 to 70.3
$0.0079
50.0%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 48.6 to 52.7
$0.0005
Counting (high)
56.8%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.4 to 58.1
$0.027
59.0%
±5.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 52.7 to 63.5
$0.0016
Identification (low)
84.4%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 87.5
$0.0055
76.0%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.0 to 78.1
$0.0004
Identification (high)
85.4%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 87.5
$0.015
78.1%
±4.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.9 to 81.3
$0.0012
OCR (low)
60.6%
$0.011
48.6%
$0.0012
by category
Single value
50.0%
Transcription
89.0%
Structured JSON
84.4%
Text localization
11.0%
Single value
37.0%
Transcription
68.2%
Structured JSON
67.7%
Text localization
18.7%
OCR (high)
61.2%
$0.030
49.9%
$0.0034
by category
Single value
50.9%
Transcription
88.7%
Structured JSON
85.7%
Text localization
9.4%
Single value
40.4%
Transcription
59.9%
Structured JSON
70.2%
Text localization
16.8%
Reasoning (low)
61.1%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 59.6 to 62.3
$0.0093
35.1%
±2.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 32.5 to 37.8
$0.0005
Reasoning (high)
63.8%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 62.3 to 66.2
$0.032
55.9%
±2.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.3 to 58.9
$0.0026

Grok 4.6 vs MiMo V2.6 Pro: Overview

Grok 4.6

Grok 4.6 is a proprietary reasoning model from xAI aimed at long-running agentic workflows, coding, and knowledge work. It accepts text and image input and returns text, with a 500,000 token context window and a knowledge cutoff of February 1, 2026. The model exposes an adjustable reasoning budget with low, medium, high, and xhigh settings, where high is the default, and it supports function calling, structured outputs, web and X search, and code execution as documented tool behaviors. Its visual capability covers interpreting images supplied alongside text prompts, which places it in the visual question answering and document understanding family, and it can also return object detection boxes as text coordinates when prompted.

xAI characterizes Grok 4.6 as the result of an extended post-training run over the Grok 4.5 lineage rather than a new pretrained base. The described recipe combines curated model-generated reasoning and technical data, engineering data, a revised optimizer, regenerated supervised fine-tuning trajectories, and reinforcement learning across agent environments spanning knowledge work, coding, kernel optimization, web development, and computer-aided design. Parameter count and architecture specifics are not disclosed. Independent measurement from Artificial Analysis places the model at 61 on its Intelligence Index, five points above Grok 4.5.

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.