Model comparison
GPT-5.6 Terra 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 Terra #11 (Estimated); 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 Terra and MiMo-V2.5-Pro share 23 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 21 results are unique to GPT-5.6 Terra; 8 to MiMo-V2.5-Pro.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 23
- GPT-5.6 Terra only
- 21
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro only
- 8
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Pick GPT-5.6 Terra 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 Terra has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 72.57 versus 70.19. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
GPT-5.6 Terra's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 92.9 against 48. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 87.4% 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 Terra | Δ | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | GPT-5.6 Terra92.9 | Margin← 44.9 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro48.0 |
| Agentic | GPT-5.6 Terra87.4 | Margin← 19.0 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro68.4 |
| Coding | GPT-5.6 Terra63.4 | Margin← 6.2 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro57.2 |
| Math | GPT-5.6 Terra80.8 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot measured |
| Multimodal | GPT-5.6 Terra80.7 | 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 87.4%B 68.4%Winner: GPT-5.6 TerraΔ 19Terminal-Bench 2.0: GPT-5.6 Terra scored 87.4%; MiMo-V2.5-Pro scored 68.4%. GPT-5.6 Terra wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 63.4%B 57.2%Winner: GPT-5.6 TerraΔ 6.2SWE-bench Pro: GPT-5.6 Terra scored 63.4%; MiMo-V2.5-Pro scored 57.2%. GPT-5.6 Terra wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GPT-5.6 Terra | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GPT-5.6 Terra$2.5 input / $15 output | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GPT-5.6 TerraNot available | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GPT-5.6 TerraNot available | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GPT-5.6 Terra1M | MiMo-V2.5-Pro1M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticGPT-5.6 Terra wins21 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Terra | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 87.4% | 68.4% | GPT-5.6 Terra leads |
| BrowseCompSource | 87.5% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | 50.2% | — | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | 81.8% | — | Not comparable |
| ExploitGymSource | 23.2% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 53.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 47.4% | 29.1% | GPT-5.6 Terra leads |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 86.3% | 94.2% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 54.1% | 38.3% | GPT-5.6 Terra leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1581 | 1265 | GPT-5.6 Terra leads |
| AA Harvey LABSource | 85.2% | 73.3% | GPT-5.6 Terra leads |
| AA ITBenchSource | 51.0% | 38.2% | GPT-5.6 Terra leads |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 31.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | 45.6% | — | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | 57.6% | 43.2% | GPT-5.6 Terra leads |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | 88% | 65.2% | GPT-5.6 Terra leads |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | 38.9% | 2.4% | GPT-5.6 Terra leads |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 63.8% | Not comparable |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | — | 72.9% | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 62.70% | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 873 | Not comparable |
CodingGPT-5.6 Terra wins7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Terra | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench ProSource | 63.4% | 57.2% | GPT-5.6 Terra leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 87.4% | 68.4% | GPT-5.6 Terra leads |
| deepSweSource | 69.6% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierCode 1.1 ExtendedSource | 55.8% | — | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | 64.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 76.7% | 60.2% | GPT-5.6 Terra leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 53.9% | 50.2% | GPT-5.6 Terra leads |
Reasoning3 benchmarks
KnowledgeGPT-5.6 Terra wins13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Terra | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 92.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 92.9% | — | Not comparable |
| HealthBench ProfessionalSource | 57.7% | — | Not comparable |
| HealthBench HardSource | 32.7% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 55.0% | 42.2% | GPT-5.6 Terra leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 92.5% | 86.6% | GPT-5.6 Terra leads |
| AA-HLESource | 41.8% | 33.8% | GPT-5.6 Terra leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -0.2% | 3.6% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 45.9% | 22.6% | GPT-5.6 Terra leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 85.2% | 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 Terra | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 71.2% | 79.9% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, GPT-5.6 Terra or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
GPT-5.6 Terra is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 72.57 to 70.19. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 87.4% and 68.4%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, GPT-5.6 Terra or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
GPT-5.6 Terra has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 92.9 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 Terra or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
GPT-5.6 Terra has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 63.4 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 Terra or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
GPT-5.6 Terra has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 87.4 versus 68.4. Inside this category, GDPval-AA 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.