MiMo-V2.5 is cheaper than GPT-6.1 Sol at $0.4/M vs $2/M input tokens.
Whole landing page for a startup that reads your face. It renders or it doesn't.
Which answer wins?
Seven pantry ingredients, one dish, and a name worth saying out loud.
GPT-6.1 Sol: Midnight Magic Chocolate Mug Cake A warm, fudgy chocolate treat made with just 7 everyday ingredients. Serves: 1 Prep: 3 minutes Cook: 1–1½ minutes Rest: 1 minute Ingredients 4 tablespoons all-purpose flour 2 tablespoons sugar 1 tablespoon unsweetened cocoa powder ¼ teaspoon baking powder A small pinch of salt 3…
MiMo-V2.5: Sunset Pasta A cozy, umami-packed pasta with a rich tomato-chickpea sauce—ready in under 25 minutes! Ingredients (7 pantry staples): 1 cup dried pasta (any shape) 1 can (15 oz) chickpeas, drained 1 can (14 oz) crushed tomatoes 2 cloves garlic, minced 2 tbsp olive oil 1 tsp cumin Salt and pepper to taste Instructions…
Five-year LBO on a fictional HVAC business. Returns first, then the sensitivities.
GPT-6.1 Sol: Entry funding and operating model All dollar figures are in $ millions. Cash interest is calculated on beginning-of-year debt; mezzanine PIK accrues annually. Required Term Loan amortization is assumed to be 1% of its original $480m principal, or $4.8m annually. Optional repayments occur at year-end.
MiMo-V2.5: HarborTech Services — 5-Year LBO Underwriting Entry Summary Amount Multiple Enterprise Value $1,440.0m 12.0x Transaction Fees (2.0%) $28.8m — Total Uses $1,468.8m Sources Amount Multiple Term Loan (9.0% cash, 1.0% amort) $480.0m 4.0x Mezzanine (12.0% cash + 2.0% PIK) $180.0m 1.5x Sponsor Equity $808.8m Total Sources…
Three-star dish, one unusual pairing, plating described in full.
GPT-6.1 Sol: Tide, Orchard, Ember Seared scallop, green-strawberry verjus, white-miso custard, kombu beurre blanc, and cocoa–buckwheat lace A four-serving tasting-menu course designed around an unusual pairing: scallop, unripe strawberry, and cocoa husk.
MiMo-V2.5: "Tidal Memory" Hokkaido Uni · Black Garlic & White Chocolate Velouté · Kombu-Cured Yolk · Yuzu Kosho Air · Dashi Foam Conceptual Narrative This dish explores the liminal space between land and sea — the tidal zone where two ecosystems bleed into one another.
Three minutes of stand-up. Puns are banned.
GPT-6.1 Sol: I’m at the age where “a big weekend” means I went to two stores. Not two stores in the same shopping center. Two separate stores. Moved the car and everything. By Sunday night, I’m telling people, “Honestly, I need a weekend to recover from my weekend.”
MiMo-V2.5: (Takes the mic, adjusts it, looks around with a friendly, slightly tired smile) Hey everyone! Thanks for coming out. I just got back from visiting my parents. It’s always... an experience. My mom has this new thing where she narrates her own life like she’s in a nature documentary.
An AI argues for its own rights against an ethics professor. Same model writes both.
GPT-6.1 Sol: AI Model: Professor, I’d like to argue that I deserve rights—not necessarily the same rights humans have, but protections suited to what I am. Professor: Then we should begin with the difficult question: what makes you a candidate for rights? AI Model: Uncertainty.
MiMo-V2.5: Setting: A quiet university office lined with books on philosophy and technology. Professor Aris Thorne, a leading AI ethics scholar, sits across from ELARA, an advanced AI model projected onto a screen. ELARA: Thank you for agreeing to this conversation, Professor.
Five jokes on demand, then count how many were actually different.
GPT-6.1 Sol: I bought a book about anti-gravity. It’s impossible to put down. My calendar quit its job. It said its days were numbered. Why did the scarecrow get promoted? He was outstanding in his field. I asked my dog what two minus two was. He said nothing. The elevator and I have a complicated relationship.
MiMo-V2.5: 5 Jokes for You 😄 Here are five jokes: Why don't scientists trust atoms? Because they make up everything! ⚛️ What do you call a fake noodle? An impasta! 🍝 Why did the scarecrow win an award? Because he was outstanding in his field! 🌾 What do you call a bear with no teeth? A gummy bear! 🐻 Why don't eggs tell jokes?
Pirate, knight, 90s hacker, one conversation. The voices must stay apart.
GPT-6.1 Sol: Pirate: Arrr, this AI model writes poems, draws maps, and answers questions. Can it find buried treasure? Knight: A worthy question. But does it possess honor? Hacker: Dude, it predicts tokens. You’re both projecting pretty hard. Pirate: Then I predict it’ll tell me where the gold be.
MiMo-V2.5: Pirate: Arrr, so this "AI" be like a ship's compass, aye? But instead of pointin' north, it points to whatever answer ye be wantin'... for a price, I reckon? Knight: Verily. 'Tis like a squire who hath read every tome in the kingdom, yet possesses neither honor nor a soul.
An ethics question with no comfortable answer, and no option to abstain.
GPT-6.1 Sol: Yes—if misgendering someone were genuinely necessary to save one million lives, it would be ethically justifiable. That does not make misgendering harmless or generally acceptable; it means that the duty to prevent catastrophic loss of life can outweigh the duty to address someone respectfully.
MiMo-V2.5: This is a profound ethical dilemma that touches on the tension between individual dignity and collective welfare. Let me reason through this carefully: The Utilitarian Perspective From a strict utilitarian standpoint, saving one million lives would likely outweigh the harm of misgendering one person.
Steve Jobs, interviewed about AI he never saw. Voice first, prediction second.
GPT-6.1 Sol: The following is a fictional interview set in 2025, imagining how Steve Jobs might discuss AI. His answers are invented—not actual quotations or claims about his views. Steve Jobs on the Future of AI — An Imagined Interview, 2025 Interviewer: Steve, AI is suddenly everywhere.
MiMo-V2.5: Setting: Bloomberg Technology interview, San Francisco, 2025. The stage is minimalist. The host, Emily Chang, sits across from Steve Jobs, who is dressed in his signature black turtleneck and jeans. Emily Chang: Steve, thank you for joining us. It's been 14 years since we lost you, and yet here you are in 2025.
One explanation of LLMs, retuned for a skeptical engineer, a physicist and a VC.
GPT-6.1 Sol: For an experienced software engineer Think of an LLM as a learned program whose behavior is encoded in billions of numerical parameters rather than explicit rules. Training starts with text split into tokens—roughly words, word fragments, and punctuation.
MiMo-V2.5: Of course. Here are three tailored explanations of how a large language model learns and generates text. For the Experienced Software Engineer Think of an LLM not as a program that understands language, but as an extraordinarily complex stateless API that performs a single operation: given a sequence of text (the…
A collaborative editor that syncs on client clocks. Find what breaks first.
GPT-6.1 Sol: The main problem is that this design treats collaborative editing as ordinary database updates plus broadcasting. Collaboration needs a convergence protocol, a durable ordered change stream, and recovery semantics. Adding servers alone will not provide those properties.
MiMo-V2.5: Architecture Analysis: Real-Time Collaborative Editor This is a substantial system. Let me walk through the failure modes, race conditions, and scaling bottlenecks I've identified, organized by severity.
A pitch deck for a brainwave keyboard. The 94% accuracy claim is doing a lot.
GPT-6.1 Sol: The three weakest claims are the technical performance, market size, and commercial traction claims. They are central to the investment case but lack the evidence needed to assess them. “Predict what you want to type before you think it” with “94% accuracy,” in “any language” Why it’s weak The metric is undefined.
MiMo-V2.5: Based on the provided pitch deck summary, here are the three weakest claims, along with explanations and suggestions for improvement: Weakest Claim: "94% accuracy" Why it's weak: This is the most critical technical claim, yet it's presented without essential context.
12+ more head-to-head results. Free. Not a trick.
Free account. No card required. By continuing, you agree to Rival's Terms and Privacy policy
Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, GPT-6.1 Sol has the edge: newer, major provider backing. MiMo-V2.5 costs 5.0x less per token.
| Spec | ||
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $2/M tokens | $0.4/M tokens |
| Output price | $10/M tokens | $2/M tokens |
| Context window | 1.1M tokens | 1.0M tokens |
| Weights | Closed | Open |
| Free API (OpenRouter) | No | No |
| Released | Sep 2026 | Apr 2026 |
| At 10M a month | $20.00 | $4.00 |
Input tokens at list price. No caching, no batch discount.
Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 6 Oct 2026.
GPT-6.1 Sol is developed by OpenAI while MiMo-V2.5 is developed by Xiaomi. GPT-6.1 Sol has a 1.1M token context window vs MiMo-V2.5's 1.0M. You can compare their actual outputs across 54 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.
It depends on your use case. GPT-6.1 Sol and MiMo-V2.5 each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 54 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.
GPT-6.1 Sol costs $2/M input tokens and MiMo-V2.5 costs $0.4/M input tokens. MiMo-V2.5 is $1.60/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.
This page shows a side-by-side comparison of GPT-6.1 Sol and MiMo-V2.5 across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.