MiMo-V2.6-Flash vs Trinity Large Thinking vs Solar Mini 4
MiMo-V2.6-Flash comes out ahead, 80 to 64 and 53 on our weighted score.
- Our pick
XiaomiMiMo-V2.6-Flash
80/100- ECI—
- Price$0.14 / $0.28
- Context1.05M
Arcee AITrinity Large Thinking
53/100- ECI—
- Price$0.25 / $0.80
- Context524K
UpstageSolar Mini 4
64/100- ECI—
- Price$0.10 / $0.40
- Context524K
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is our pick
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 80/100 against Solar Mini 4 (64) and Trinity Large Thinking (53). It leads on inputs & features and context window. 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 priceMiMo-V2.6-Flash and Solar Mini 4MiMo-V2.6-Flash $0.175 · Solar Mini 4 $0.175 · Trinity Large Thinking $0.388 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextMiMo-V2.6-FlashMiMo-V2.6-Flash 1,048,576 · Trinity Large Thinking 524,288 · Solar Mini 4 524,288 tokens
- Widest inputsMiMo-V2.6-FlashMiMo-V2.6-Flash: Text, Images, Audio, Video · Trinity Large Thinking: Text · Solar Mini 4: Text
- Self-hostingMiMo-V2.6-Flash and Trinity Large ThinkingPublishes downloadable weights (OpenMDW-1.1)
| Measure | Weight | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Trinity Large Thinking | Solar Mini 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 82 | 66 | 82 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 90 | 35 | 45 |
| Context window | 20% | 61 | 49 | 49 |
| Overall | 100% | 80/100 | 53/100 | 64/100 |
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 | MiMo-V2.6-FlashXiaomi | Trinity Large ThinkingArcee AI | Solar Mini 4Upstage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.14 | $0.25 | $0.10 (best) |
| Output | $0.28 (best) | $0.80 | $0.40 |
| Cached input | $0.0028 (best) | $0.06 | $0.01 |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.175 (best) | $0.388 | $0.175 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Xiaomi API | Official Arcee API | Official Upstage API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 524,288 tokens | 524,288 tokens |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) | 131,072 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | Yes | No | No |
| Video | Yes | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes | Yesminimal · low · medium · high · xhigh · max |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | OpenOpenMDW-1.1 | Proprietary |
| API model ID | mimo-v2.6-flash | trinity-large-thinking | solar-mini4 |
| API providers | 23 (best) | 3 | 4 |
| Released | Sep 22, 2026 | Apr 1, 2026 | Sep 22, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | — | Feb 2026 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash$1.96
- Trinity Large Thinking$4.10
- Solar Mini 4$1.80
Which should you choose?
Which is better: MiMo-V2.6-Flash, Trinity Large Thinking or Solar Mini 4?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 80/100 against Solar Mini 4 (64) and Trinity Large Thinking (53). It leads on inputs & features and context window. 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, MiMo-V2.6-Flash, Trinity Large Thinking or Solar Mini 4?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is cheaper at $0.14 input / $0.28 output per million tokens (official Xiaomi API price). Solar Mini 4 costs $0.10 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Upstage API price); Trinity Large Thinking costs $0.25 input / $0.80 output per million tokens (official Arcee API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.175 per million tokens for MiMo-V2.6-Flash versus $0.175 for Solar Mini 4 (1× as much) and $0.388 for Trinity Large Thinking (2.2× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. MiMo-V2.6-Flash has not been scored yet, Trinity Large Thinking has not been scored yet and Solar Mini 4 has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for MiMo-V2.6-Flash, Trinity Large Thinking and Solar Mini 4 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?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 524,288 for Trinity Large Thinking and 524,288 for Solar Mini 4. Maximum output per response: MiMo-V2.6-Flash up to 131,072, Trinity Large Thinking up to 262,144, Solar Mini 4 up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash accepts text, images, audio and video; Trinity Large Thinking accepts text; Solar Mini 4 accepts text. MiMo-V2.6-Flash handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash and Trinity Large Thinking publishes its weights (OpenMDW-1.1) and can be self-hosted; Solar Mini 4 is proprietary.
Which is newer?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the newest, released Sep 22, 2026. Solar Mini 4 came out Sep 22, 2026; Trinity Large Thinking came out Apr 1, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Solar Mini 4 Feb 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.
