The discussion centers on the MiMo-v2.6-Pro evaluation, with several participants questioning the Intelligence Index and data presentation. Egeres finds the 46 score suspicious relative to DeepSeek‑V4.1 and cites Xiaomi materials suggesting DeepSeek sometimes surpasses MiMo, while jampekka calls out an odd token-generation claim (140M tokens) that looks verbose compared with the median. Throwa356262 and jampekka speculate the issue might be human or rule‑based bot error, and theanonymousone suggests the pages use a template that gets filled in - pointing to similar anomalies elsewhere.
Participants are split on practical takeaways: Gareth321 says OpenAI limits and a perceived drop in intelligence are driving him to try Chinese models despite slower response, and unsupp0rted echoes frustration with shrinking allotments and degraded utility. Dom96 praises MiMo’s capabilities and pricing but disputes claims of speed, reporting KillSwitch‑Bench results that place MiMo behind leading models (MiMo‑V2.6‑Pro 38.8 versus top models much higher). Ignoramous highlights Xiaomi’s reported $3.47M training cost, arguing MiMo is extremely cheap compared with Big‑Five estimates and therefore attractive given its benchmark parity with Muse Spark 1.3 and low cache rates.
Summary generated by AI from the linked article. hn.today is not affiliated with Hacker News or Y Combinator.