ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Ornith 1.5 35B A3B vs Seed Character vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash

MiMo-V2.6-Flash comes out ahead, 80 to 73 and 66 on our weighted score, though Seed Character is 7% cheaper per token.

  1. DeepReinforce

    Ornith 1.5 35B A3B

    Released Aug 18, 2026

    66/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.10 / $0.40
    • Context262K
  2. ByteDance Seed

    Seed Character

    Released Jun 23, 2026

    73/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.119 / $0.297
    • Context256K
  3. Our pick

    Xiaomi

    MiMo-V2.6-Flash

    Released Sep 22, 2026New

    80/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.14 / $0.28
    • Context1.05M
01 — Verdict

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is our pick

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 80/100 against Seed Character (73) and Ornith 1.5 35B A3B (66). 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 priceSeed CharacterSeed Character $0.163 · 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 · Seed Character 256,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsMiMo-V2.6-FlashOrnith 1.5 35B A3B: Text, Images · Seed Character: Text, Images, Video · MiMo-V2.6-Flash: Text, Images, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingOrnith 1.5 35B A3B and MiMo-V2.6-FlashPublishes downloadable weights (MIT)
How the score is built
MeasureWeightOrnith 1.5 35B A3BSeed CharacterMiMo-V2.6-Flash
Price50%828482
Inputs & features30%608090
Context window20%373661
Overall100%66/10073/10080/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Ornith 1.5 35B A3B vs Seed Character vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash specifications side by side
SpecificationOrnith 1.5 35B A3BDeepReinforceSeed CharacterByteDance SeedMiMo-V2.6-FlashXiaomi
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$0.10 (best)$0.119$0.14
Output$0.40$0.297$0.28 (best)
Cached input—$0.024$0.0028 (best)
Blended (3:1)$0.175$0.163 (best)$0.175
Long-context rateSame rateOver 32K: $0.178 / $0.891Same rate
Price sourceMedian of 1 providersOfficial Volcengine Ark APIOfficial Xiaomi API
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens256,000 tokens1,048,576 tokens (best)
Max output—256,000 tokens (best)131,072 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesYes
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoYes
VideoNoYesYes
ReasoningYesYesminimal · low · highYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoYesYes
Availability
WeightsOpenMITProprietaryOpen
API model ID—doubao-seed-character-260628mimo-v2.6-flash
API providers1323 (best)
ReleasedAug 18, 2026Jun 23, 2026Sep 22, 2026
Knowledge cutoff———
03 — Cost

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
  • Seed Character$1.78
  • MiMo-V2.6-Flash$1.96
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Ornith 1.5 35B A3B, Seed Character or MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 80/100 against Seed Character (73) and Ornith 1.5 35B A3B (66). 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, Ornith 1.5 35B A3B, Seed Character or MiMo-V2.6-Flash?

Seed Character is cheaper at $0.119 input / $0.297 output per million tokens (official Volcengine Ark API price). 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 $0.163 per million tokens for Seed Character versus $0.175 for Ornith 1.5 35B A3B (1.1× as much) and $0.175 for MiMo-V2.6-Flash (1.1× 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, Seed Character 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, Seed Character 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 256,000 for Seed Character. Maximum output per response: Seed Character up to 256,000, 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; Seed Character 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?

Ornith 1.5 35B A3B and MiMo-V2.6-Flash publishes its weights (MIT) and can be self-hosted; Seed Character is proprietary.

Which is newer?

MiMo-V2.6-Flash is the newest, released Sep 22, 2026. Ornith 1.5 35B A3B came out Aug 18, 2026; Seed Character came out Jun 23, 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.