Ornith 1.5 35B A3B vs Gemma 4 12B IT vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash
MiMo-V2.6-Flash comes out ahead, 80 to 70 and 66 on our weighted score, though Gemma 4 12B IT is 29% cheaper per token.
DeepReinforce
Ornith 1.5 35B A3B
66/100- ECI—
- Price$0.10 / $0.40
- Context262K
GoogleGemma 4 12B IT
70/100- ECI—
- Price$0.075 / $0.275
- Context262K
- 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 Gemma 4 12B IT (70) and Ornith 1.5 35B A3B (66). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Gemma 4 12B IT 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 priceGemma 4 12B ITGemma 4 12B IT $0.125 · Ornith 1.5 35B A3B $0.175 · MiMo-V2.6-Flash $0.175 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextMiMo-V2.6-FlashMiMo-V2.6-Flash 1,048,576 · Ornith 1.5 35B A3B 262,144 · Gemma 4 12B IT 262,144 tokens
- Widest inputsMiMo-V2.6-FlashOrnith 1.5 35B A3B: Text, Images · Gemma 4 12B IT: Text, Images · MiMo-V2.6-Flash: Text, Images, Audio, Video
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | Ornith 1.5 35B A3B | Gemma 4 12B IT | MiMo-V2.6-Flash |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 82 | 89 | 82 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 60 | 60 | 90 |
| Context window | 20% | 37 | 37 | 61 |
| Overall | 100% | 66/100 | 70/100 | 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 | Ornith 1.5 35B A3BDeepReinforce | Gemma 4 12B ITGoogle | MiMo-V2.6-FlashXiaomi |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.10 | $0.075 (best) | $0.14 |
| Output | $0.40 | $0.275 (best) | $0.28 |
| Cached input | — | — | $0.0028 |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.175 | $0.125 (best) | $0.175 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 1 providers | Median of 2 providers | Official Xiaomi API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 262,144 tokens | 262,144 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) |
| Max output | — | 32,768 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | Yes |
| Video | No | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | OpenMIT | Open | Open |
| API model ID | — | — | mimo-v2.6-flash |
| API providers | 1 | 2 | 23 (best) |
| Released | Aug 18, 2026 | Jun 9, 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.
- Ornith 1.5 35B A3B$1.80
- Gemma 4 12B IT$1.30
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash$1.96
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Ornith 1.5 35B A3B, Gemma 4 12B IT or MiMo-V2.6-Flash?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 80/100 against Gemma 4 12B IT (70) and Ornith 1.5 35B A3B (66). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Gemma 4 12B IT 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, Ornith 1.5 35B A3B, Gemma 4 12B IT or MiMo-V2.6-Flash?
Gemma 4 12B IT is cheaper at $0.075 input / $0.275 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). Ornith 1.5 35B A3B costs $0.10 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider); MiMo-V2.6-Flash costs $0.14 input / $0.28 output per million tokens (official Xiaomi API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.125 per million tokens for Gemma 4 12B IT versus $0.175 for Ornith 1.5 35B A3B (1.4× as much) and $0.175 for MiMo-V2.6-Flash (1.4× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Ornith 1.5 35B A3B has not been scored yet, Gemma 4 12B IT 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 Ornith 1.5 35B A3B, Gemma 4 12B IT 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?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 262,144 for Ornith 1.5 35B A3B and 262,144 for Gemma 4 12B IT. Maximum output per response: Gemma 4 12B IT up to 32,768, MiMo-V2.6-Flash up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Ornith 1.5 35B A3B accepts text and images; Gemma 4 12B IT accepts text and images; 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?
Yes, all three publish their weights (MIT), so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the newest, released Sep 22, 2026. Ornith 1.5 35B A3B came out Aug 18, 2026; Gemma 4 12B IT came out Jun 9, 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.
