MiMo-V2.6-Pro vs Toast 1 vs Ornith 1.5 35B A3B
MiMo-V2.6-Pro comes out ahead, 67 to 59 and 47 on our weighted score, though Toast 1 is 26% cheaper per token.
- Our pick
XiaomiMiMo-V2.6-Pro
67/100- ECI—
- Price$0.435 / $0.87
- Context1.05M
Mixedbread
Toast 1
47/100- ECI—
- Price$0.30 / $0.72
- Context131K
DeepReinforce
Ornith 1.5 35B A3B
59/100- ECI—
- Price$0.20 / $1.70
- Context262K
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is our pick
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the better all-round choice, scoring 67/100 against Ornith 1.5 35B A3B (59) and Toast 1 (47). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Toast 1 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 priceToast 1Toast 1 $0.405 · MiMo-V2.6-Pro $0.544 · Ornith 1.5 35B A3B $0.575 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextMiMo-V2.6-ProMiMo-V2.6-Pro 1,048,576 · Ornith 1.5 35B A3B 262,144 · Toast 1 131,000 tokens
- Widest inputsMiMo-V2.6-ProMiMo-V2.6-Pro: Text, Images, Audio, Video · Toast 1: Text · Ornith 1.5 35B A3B: Text, Images
- Self-hostingMiMo-V2.6-Pro and Ornith 1.5 35B A3BPublishes downloadable weights (MIT)
| Measure | Weight | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Toast 1 | Ornith 1.5 35B A3B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 62 | 68 | 61 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 80 | 25 | 70 |
| Context window | 20% | 61 | 24 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 67/100 | 47/100 | 59/100 |
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-ProXiaomi | Toast 1Mixedbread | Ornith 1.5 35B A3BDeepReinforce |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.435 | $0.30 | $0.20 (best) |
| Output | $0.87 | $0.72 (best) | $1.70 |
| Cached input | $0.0036 | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.544 | $0.405 (best) | $0.575 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Xiaomi API | Median of 1 providers | Median of 2 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 131,000 tokens | 262,144 tokens |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens (best) | 4,000 tokens | — |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | Yes | No | No |
| Video | Yes | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary | OpenMIT |
| API model ID | mimo-v2.6-pro | — | — |
| API providers | 16 (best) | 1 | 2 |
| Released | Sep 22, 2026 | Aug 13, 2026 | Aug 18, 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$6.09
- Toast 1$4.44
- Ornith 1.5 35B A3B$5.40
Which should you choose?
Which is better: MiMo-V2.6-Pro, Toast 1 or Ornith 1.5 35B A3B?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the better all-round choice, scoring 67/100 against Ornith 1.5 35B A3B (59) and Toast 1 (47). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Toast 1 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, Toast 1 or Ornith 1.5 35B A3B?
Toast 1 is cheaper at $0.30 input / $0.72 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). MiMo-V2.6-Pro costs $0.435 input / $0.87 output per million tokens (official Xiaomi API price); Ornith 1.5 35B A3B costs $0.20 input / $1.70 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.405 per million tokens for Toast 1 versus $0.544 for MiMo-V2.6-Pro (1.3× as much) and $0.575 for Ornith 1.5 35B A3B (1.4× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. MiMo-V2.6-Pro has not been scored yet, Toast 1 has not been scored yet and Ornith 1.5 35B A3B has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for MiMo-V2.6-Pro, Toast 1 and Ornith 1.5 35B A3B 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-Pro has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 262,144 for Ornith 1.5 35B A3B and 131,000 for Toast 1. Maximum output per response: MiMo-V2.6-Pro up to 131,072, Toast 1 up to 4,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro accepts text, images, audio and video; Toast 1 accepts text; Ornith 1.5 35B A3B accepts text and images. MiMo-V2.6-Pro handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro and Ornith 1.5 35B A3B publishes its weights (MIT) and can be self-hosted; Toast 1 is proprietary.
Which is newer?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the newest, released Sep 22, 2026. Ornith 1.5 35B A3B came out Aug 18, 2026; Toast 1 came out Aug 13, 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.
