Grok Build 0.1 vs MiMo-V2-Pro vs Qwen3.5 9B Base
Too close to call on our weighted score (Grok Build 0.1 53, Qwen3.5 9B Base 50, MiMo-V2-Pro 42). The right pick depends on what you value most.
xAIGrok Build 0.1
53/100- ECI—
- Price$1.00 / $2.00
- Context256K
XiaomiMiMo-V2-Pro
42/100- ECI—
- Price$1.00 / $3.00
- Context1.05M
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.5 9B Base
50/100- ECI—
- Price$0.30 / $0.807
- Context262K
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 3 points (Grok Build 0.1 53/100, Qwen3.5 9B Base 50/100, MiMo-V2-Pro 42/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen3.5 9B Base on price and MiMo-V2-Pro for long inputs. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceQwen3.5 9B BaseQwen3.5 9B Base $0.427 · Grok Build 0.1 $1.25 · MiMo-V2-Pro $1.50 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextMiMo-V2-ProMiMo-V2-Pro 1,048,576 · Qwen3.5 9B Base 262,144 · Grok Build 0.1 256,000 tokens
- Widest inputsGrok Build 0.1 and Qwen3.5 9B BaseGrok Build 0.1: Text, Images, PDFs · MiMo-V2-Pro: Text · Qwen3.5 9B Base: Text, Images, Video
- Self-hostingQwen3.5 9B BasePublishes downloadable weights (Apache-2.0)
| Measure | Weight | Grok Build 0.1 | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.5 9B Base |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 43 | 40 | 65 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 80 | 35 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 36 | 61 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 53/100 | 42/100 | 50/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Grok Build 0.1xAI | MiMo-V2-ProXiaomi | Qwen3.5 9B BaseAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $1.00 | $1.00 | $0.30 (best) |
| Output | $2.00 | $3.00 | $0.807 (best) |
| Cached input | $0.20 | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.25 | $1.50 | $0.427 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Over 200K: $2.00 / $4.00 | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official xAI API | Median of 1 providers | Median of 1 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 256,000 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 262,144 tokens |
| Max output | 256,000 tokens (best) | 131,072 tokens | 65,536 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No | Yes |
| PDFs | Yes | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | No |
| Structured output | Yes | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary | OpenApache-2.0 |
| API model ID | grok-build-0.1 | — | — |
| API providers | 20 (best) | 2 | 1 |
| Released | Apr 16, 2026 | Mar 18, 2026 | Feb 26, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Dec 2024 | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Grok Build 0.1$14.00
- MiMo-V2-Pro$16.00
- Qwen3.5 9B Base$4.61
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Grok Build 0.1, MiMo-V2-Pro or Qwen3.5 9B Base?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 3 points (Grok Build 0.1 53/100, Qwen3.5 9B Base 50/100, MiMo-V2-Pro 42/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen3.5 9B Base on price and MiMo-V2-Pro for long inputs. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Grok Build 0.1, MiMo-V2-Pro or Qwen3.5 9B Base?
Qwen3.5 9B Base is cheaper at $0.30 input / $0.807 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). Grok Build 0.1 costs $1.00 input / $2.00 output per million tokens (official xAI API price); MiMo-V2-Pro costs $1.00 input / $3.00 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.427 per million tokens for Qwen3.5 9B Base versus $1.25 for Grok Build 0.1 (2.9× as much) and $1.50 for MiMo-V2-Pro (3.5× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Grok Build 0.1 has not been scored yet, MiMo-V2-Pro has not been scored yet and Qwen3.5 9B Base has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Grok Build 0.1, MiMo-V2-Pro and Qwen3.5 9B Base yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Qwen3.5 9B Base does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2-Pro has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 262,144 for Qwen3.5 9B Base and 256,000 for Grok Build 0.1. Maximum output per response: Grok Build 0.1 up to 256,000, MiMo-V2-Pro up to 131,072, Qwen3.5 9B Base up to 65,536 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Grok Build 0.1 accepts text, images and PDFs; MiMo-V2-Pro accepts text; Qwen3.5 9B Base accepts text, images and video. Grok Build 0.1 handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Qwen3.5 9B Base publishes its weights (Apache-2.0) and can be self-hosted; Grok Build 0.1 and MiMo-V2-Pro is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Grok Build 0.1 is the newest, released Apr 16, 2026. MiMo-V2-Pro came out Mar 18, 2026; Qwen3.5 9B Base came out Feb 26, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: MiMo-V2-Pro Dec 2024.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.
