MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed vs Pareto
MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed comes out ahead, 44 to 34 on our weighted score, though Pareto is 31% cheaper per token.
- Our pick
XiaomiMiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed
44/100- ECI—
- Price$4.35 / $8.70
- Context1.05M
Unbiased
Pareto
34/100- ECI—
- Price$2.50 / $7.50
- Context262K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed is our pick
MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed is the better all-round choice, scoring 44/100 against Pareto (34). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Pareto wins on price. 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 priceParetoPareto $3.75 · MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed $5.44 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextMiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeedMiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed 1,048,576 · Pareto 262,144 tokens
- Widest inputsMiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeedMiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed: Text, Images, Audio, Video · Pareto: Text, Images
- Self-hostingMiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeedPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed | Pareto |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 15 | 23 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 80 | 50 |
| Context window | 20% | 61 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 44/100 | 34/100 |
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-Pro-UltraSpeedXiaomi | ParetoUnbiased |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $4.35 | $2.50 (best) |
| Output | $8.70 | $7.50 (best) |
| Cached input | $0.036 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $5.44 | $3.75 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Xiaomi API | Median of 4 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 262,144 tokens |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens | 131,072 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | Yes | No |
| Video | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| API model ID | mimo-v2.6-pro-ultraspeed | — |
| API providers | 9 (best) | 4 |
| Released | Sep 21, 2026 | Sep 17, 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.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed$60.90
- Pareto$40.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed or Pareto?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed is the better all-round choice, scoring 44/100 against Pareto (34). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Pareto wins on price. 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-Pro-UltraSpeed or Pareto?
Pareto is cheaper at $2.50 input / $7.50 output per million tokens (median across 4 API providers). MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed costs $4.35 input / $8.70 output per million tokens (official Xiaomi API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $3.75 per million tokens for Pareto versus $5.44 for MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed (1.4× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed has not been scored yet and Pareto has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed and Pareto yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 262,144 for Pareto. Maximum output per response: MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed up to 131,072, Pareto up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed accepts text, images, audio and video; Pareto accepts text and images. MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Pareto is proprietary.
Which is newer?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed is the newest, released Sep 21, 2026. Pareto came out Sep 17, 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 Oct 4, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Qwen 3.8 Max PrimeThree-way comparison
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed vs Qwen 3.8 Max PrimeAlibaba (Qwen)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed vs Command A PlusCohere
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed vs Kimi K2.7 Code HighspeedMoonshot AI
- Pareto vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95BAlibaba (Qwen)
- Pareto vs Kimi K2.7 Code HighspeedMoonshot AI
- Pareto vs Command A PlusCohere
