Model comparison
GPT-5.6 Sol vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Head-to-head evidence from 23 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: GPT-5.6 Sol #3 (Supported); MiMo-V2.5-Pro #14 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GPT-5.6 Sol and MiMo-V2.5-Pro share 23 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 23 results are unique to GPT-5.6 Sol; 8 to MiMo-V2.5-Pro.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 23
- GPT-5.6 Sol only
- 23
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro only
- 8
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Pick GPT-5.6 Sol if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MiMo-V2.5-Pro only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 23 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 3 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
GPT-5.6 Sol is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 81.96 to 70.19. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GPT-5.6 Sol's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 94.6 against 48. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 91.9% to 68.4%.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | GPT-5.6 Sol | Δ | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | GPT-5.6 Sol94.6 | Margin← 46.6 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro48.0 |
| Agentic | GPT-5.6 Sol92.0 | Margin← 23.6 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro68.4 |
| Coding | GPT-5.6 Sol64.6 | Margin← 7.4 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro57.2 |
| Math | GPT-5.6 Sol87.5 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot measured |
| Multimodal | GPT-5.6 Sol83.0 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 91.9%B 68.4%Winner: GPT-5.6 SolΔ 23.5Terminal-Bench 2.0: GPT-5.6 Sol scored 91.9%; MiMo-V2.5-Pro scored 68.4%. GPT-5.6 Sol wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 64.6%B 57.2%Winner: GPT-5.6 SolΔ 7.4SWE-bench Pro: GPT-5.6 Sol scored 64.6%; MiMo-V2.5-Pro scored 57.2%. GPT-5.6 Sol wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GPT-5.6 Sol | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GPT-5.6 Sol$5 input / $30 output | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GPT-5.6 SolNot available | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GPT-5.6 SolNot available | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GPT-5.6 Sol1M | MiMo-V2.5-Pro1M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticGPT-5.6 Sol wins21 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 91.9% | 68.4% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| BrowseCompSource | 92.2% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | 62.6% | — | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | 84.5% | — | Not comparable |
| ExploitGymSource | 33.7% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 58% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 54.0% | 29.1% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 85.1% | 94.2% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 61.8% | 38.3% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1736 | 1265 | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 1501 | 873 | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| AA ITBenchSource | 56.2% | 38.2% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 33.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | 51.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | 87.2% | 73.3% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| terminalBenchHardSource | 65.9% | 43.2% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | 88% | 65.2% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 63.8% | Not comparable |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | — | 72.9% | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 2.4% | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 62.70% | Not comparable |
CodingGPT-5.6 Sol wins8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench ProSource | 64.6% | 57.2% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 91.9% | 68.4% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| deepSweSource | 72.7% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierCode 1.1 ExtendedSource | 60.6% | — | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | 67.2% | — | Not comparable |
| VulcanBench v3Source | 87.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 77.4% | 60.2% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 56.1% | 50.2% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
KnowledgeGPT-5.6 Sol wins13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 94.6% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 94.6% | — | Not comparable |
| HealthBench ProfessionalSource | 60.5% | — | Not comparable |
| HealthBench HardSource | 33.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 58.9% | 42.2% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 94.1% | 86.6% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| AA-HLESource | 47.2% | 33.8% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 21.7% | 3.6% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 58.5% | 22.6% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 88.8% | 24.5% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| HLESource | — | 48% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 34% | Not comparable |
| AA Openness IndexSource | — | 38.9% | Not comparable |
Math3 benchmarks
Multimodal4 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Sol | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 72.7% | 79.9% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, GPT-5.6 Sol or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
GPT-5.6 Sol is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 81.96 to 70.19. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 91.9% and 68.4%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, GPT-5.6 Sol or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
GPT-5.6 Sol has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 94.6 versus 48. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, GPT-5.6 Sol or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
GPT-5.6 Sol has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 64.6 versus 57.2. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5.6 Sol or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
GPT-5.6 Sol has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 92 versus 68.4. Inside this category, AA Briefcase is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.