LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Price, context window & benchmark comparison
VS
Compare different models
Verdict: MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 2.2× cheaper than LFM2.5-2.6B on a typical 3:1 input/output mix. MiMo-V2.6-Flash has the larger context window (1.1M vs 128K).
| LFM2.5-2.6B | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Input price / 1M | $0.35 | $0.14 |
| Output price / 1M | $0.50 | $0.28 |
| Blended price (3:1) | $0.39 | $0.18 |
| Cached input / 1M | $0.04 | $0.0028 |
| Context window | 128K | 1.1M |
| Max output | 8K | 131K |
| Intelligence index | — | 26.7 |
| Coding index | 7.7 | — |
| Providers | — | 10 |
| Best provider uptime (30m) | — | 100.0% |
| Vision input | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Released | 2026-08-11 | 2026-09-21 |
| Retirement | — | — |
Cost calculator
FAQ
Which is cheaper, LFM2.5-2.6B or MiMo-V2.6-Flash?
MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 2.2× cheaper than LFM2.5-2.6B on a typical 3:1 input/output mix.
LFM2.5-2.6B vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash: which has a bigger context window?
LFM2.5-2.6B: 128,000 tokens. MiMo-V2.6-Flash: 1,050,000 tokens.
How much would 1 million requests cost?
At 2,000 input + 500 output tokens per request: LFM2.5-2.6B ≈ $950.00, MiMo-V2.6-Flash ≈ $420.00.
More comparisons
LFM2.5-2.6B vs GPT-6.1 TerraLFM2.5-2.6B vs GPT-6.1 Terra ProLFM2.5-2.6B vs Kimi K3.1 ProLFM2.5-2.6B vs MiniMax M3.1 FlashLFM2.5-2.6B vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017LFM2.5-2.6B vs Nemotron 3.5 Super VLLFM2.5-2.6B vs Gemini 4 ArgonLFM2.5-2.6B vs Claude Haiku 5.5LFM2.5-2.6B vs Nano Banana 2.1LFM2.5-2.6B vs Mistral Large 4LFM2.5-2.6B vs GPT-6.1 Sol ProLFM2.5-2.6B vs GPT-6.1 SolLFM2.5-2.6B vs Claude Sonnet 5.5LFM2.5-2.6B vs GLM 5.3 PrimeLFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeLFM2.5-2.6B vs Command A+MiMo-V2.6-Flash vs GPT-6.1 TerraMiMo-V2.6-Flash vs GPT-6.1 Terra ProMiMo-V2.6-Flash vs Kimi K3.1 ProMiMo-V2.6-Flash vs MiniMax M3.1 FlashMiMo-V2.6-Flash vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017MiMo-V2.6-Flash vs Nemotron 3.5 Super VLMiMo-V2.6-Flash vs Gemini 4 ArgonMiMo-V2.6-Flash vs Claude Haiku 5.5