Mercury 3 vs Kimi K3.1 Pro vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash
MiMo-V2.6-Flash comes out ahead, 80 to 67 and 46 on our weighted score, though Mercury 3 is 7% cheaper per token.
InceptionMercury 3
67/100- ECI—
- Price$0.10 / $0.35
- Context1M
Moonshot AIKimi K3.1 Pro
46/100- ECI—
- Price$2.00 / $10.00
- Context1.05M
- Our pick
XiaomiMiMo-V2.6-Flash
80/100- ECI—
- Price$0.14 / $0.28
- Context1.05M
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is our pick
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 80/100 against Mercury 3 (67) and Kimi K3.1 Pro (46). It leads on inputs & features. 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 priceMercury 3Mercury 3 $0.163 · MiMo-V2.6-Flash $0.175 · Kimi K3.1 Pro $4.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextKimi K3.1 Pro and MiMo-V2.6-FlashKimi K3.1 Pro 1,048,576 · MiMo-V2.6-Flash 1,048,576 · Mercury 3 1,000,000 tokens
- Widest inputsMiMo-V2.6-FlashMercury 3: Text · Kimi K3.1 Pro: Text, Images, Video · MiMo-V2.6-Flash: Text, Images, Audio, Video
- Self-hostingMiMo-V2.6-FlashPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Mercury 3 | Kimi K3.1 Pro | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 84 | 20 | 82 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 45 | 80 | 90 |
| Context window | 20% | 60 | 61 | 61 |
| Overall | 100% | 67/100 | 46/100 | 80/100 |
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 | Mercury 3Inception | Kimi K3.1 ProMoonshot AI | MiMo-V2.6-FlashXiaomi |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.10 (best) | $2.00 | $0.14 |
| Output | $0.35 | $10.00 | $0.28 (best) |
| Cached input | $0.01 | $0.20 | $0.0028 (best) |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.163 (best) | $4.00 | $0.175 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Inception API | Official Moonshot AI API | Official Xiaomi API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 1,048,576 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens | 131,072 tokens | 131,072 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | Yes |
| Video | No | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yeslow · medium · high | Yeslow · high · max | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | mercury-3 | kimi-k3.1-pro | mimo-v2.6-flash |
| API providers | 3 | 17 | 23 (best) |
| Released | Oct 16, 2026 | Oct 23, 2026 | Sep 22, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | — | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Mercury 3$1.70
- Kimi K3.1 Pro$40.00
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash$1.96
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Mercury 3, Kimi K3.1 Pro or MiMo-V2.6-Flash?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 80/100 against Mercury 3 (67) and Kimi K3.1 Pro (46). It leads on inputs & features. 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, Mercury 3, Kimi K3.1 Pro or MiMo-V2.6-Flash?
Mercury 3 is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.35 output per million tokens (official Inception API price). MiMo-V2.6-Flash costs $0.14 input / $0.28 output per million tokens (official Xiaomi API price); Kimi K3.1 Pro costs $2.00 input / $10.00 output per million tokens (official Moonshot AI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.163 per million tokens for Mercury 3 versus $0.175 for MiMo-V2.6-Flash (1.1× as much) and $4.00 for Kimi K3.1 Pro (25× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Mercury 3 has not been scored yet, Kimi K3.1 Pro has not been scored yet and MiMo-V2.6-Flash has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Mercury 3, Kimi K3.1 Pro and MiMo-V2.6-Flash yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Kimi K3.1 Pro and MiMo-V2.6-Flash have the largest context windows (1,048,576 and 1,048,576 tokens), against 1,000,000 for Mercury 3. Maximum output per response: Mercury 3 up to 131,072, Kimi K3.1 Pro up to 131,072, MiMo-V2.6-Flash up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Mercury 3 accepts text; Kimi K3.1 Pro accepts text, images and video; MiMo-V2.6-Flash accepts text, images, audio and video. MiMo-V2.6-Flash handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Mercury 3 and Kimi K3.1 Pro is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Kimi K3.1 Pro is the newest, released Oct 23, 2026. Mercury 3 came out Oct 16, 2026; MiMo-V2.6-Flash came out Sep 22, 2026.
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.
