MiMo-V2.6 tops the open-weights board, and runs on DGX Sparks
Xiaomi's MiMo-V2.6-Pro sat at number one on Artificial Analysis's open-weights leaderboard on 27 September, and DGX Spark owners had both versions running within days. One owner reported 68.3 tokens a second on eight Sparks with speculative decoding, up from 17.8, and the early problem was tool use.
Plays here, from YouTube
Xiaomi, the phone maker, has a new open model, MiMo-V2.6. When I read Artificial Analysis's open-weights leaderboard on 27 September, the bigger Pro version sat at number one, with an Intelligence Index of 46. That is one point ahead of the full GLM 5.3.
The smaller Flash version was not on the board when I read it on 25 September. Two days later it was there with a score of 38, four points below GLM 5.3 Flash (42 minus 38), which is the model my own four Sparks run.
| Model | Intelligence Index |
|---|---|
| MiMo-V2.6-Pro | 46 |
| GLM-5.3 (max) | 45 |
| GLM-5.3-Flash | 42 |
| MiMo-V2.6-Flash | 38 |
Artificial Analysis's open-weights leaderboard, read on 27 September 2026.
The Pro version on eight Sparks
Within days, Spark owners had both versions running. One owner posted on NVIDIA's developer forum that they had spread the Pro version across eight Sparks and got 17.8 tokens a second on four long structured tasks.
Then they switched on speculative decoding (DFlash in the thread), where a small helper model guesses several tokens ahead and the big model checks them all in one go. The owner reported 68.3 tokens a second with it, which by my own maths is 3.84 times the speed (68.3 divided by 17.8). They also reported that the answers still matched the slow run byte for byte across 12 test cases, including two that the slow run had got wrong.
The Flash version on two Sparks
Xiaomi's model card lists the Flash version at 309 billion parameters in total, of which 15 billion are active, with a context of 1 million tokens, and says it takes text, image, video and audio. A separate forum post reported that it fits on just two Sparks, at 40 to 46 tokens a second for one user and 233 in total with 16 users at once.
In another thread on the Flash version, a reply on 22 September said they had found another 1.75GB of memory on each box by reusing the display memory trick from the week before, following the instructions in a DeepSeek v4.1 thread.
The early problem
The early problem was tool use. In that same thread, one owner wrote on 22 September that in a coding agent the Flash version would fire off 90 to 130 searches at once. The same owner then wrote that, so far, an updated recipe and some tweaking had fixed it.
Read more
- Artificial Analysis, open-weights leaderboardartificialanalysis.ai
- An owner's MiMo-V2.6-Pro speeds on eight DGX Sparksforums.developer.nvidia.com
- An owner's MiMo-V2.6-Flash speeds on two DGX Sparksforums.developer.nvidia.com
- The forum thread on the Flash version, with the memory tip and the tool-use fixforums.developer.nvidia.com
- Xiaomi's model card for MiMo-V2.6-Flash on Hugging Facehuggingface.co
The numbers in this story
| Figure | What it is | From | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 46 and 45 | The Pro version and the full GLM 5.3 on the open-weights board | artificialanalysis.ai | Artificial Analysis's score |
| 38 and 42 | The Flash version and GLM 5.3 Flash, four points apart | Artificial Analysis's board on 27 September; 42 minus 38 | my own maths |
| 17.8 to 68.3 tok/s | The Pro version on eight Sparks, before and after speculative decoding | forums.developer.nvidia.com | an owner's report |
| 309B, 15B and 1M tokens | The Flash version's total and active parameters, and its context | huggingface.co | the maker's claim |
| about 45 tok/s for one user, 233 in total for 16 | The Flash version on two Sparks, for one user and for 16 users | forums.developer.nvidia.com | an owner's report |
| 1.75GB on each box | Memory freed on each Spark with the display memory trick | forums.developer.nvidia.com | an owner's report |
My Sparks would run a little faster than these figures. I cap their graphics chips at 2,200MHz, against about 2,400 uncapped, to cut their power use. When I tested the cap on one box in August, writing speed stayed within 1 per cent, reading was 2 to 4 per cent slower, and the chip's peak power fell from 55.5W to 43.3W.
If a number on this page is wrong, I would rather know. Tell me in the comments under the video and I will correct it here and pin the correction there. What has been corrected so far is on the corrections page.