Model decision surface
Compare AI models
Start with Laguna S 2.1 and MiMo-V2.5, or choose any two current ranked language models. Compare capability evidence, price, context, provider availability, and weight access without pretending one field decides every use case.
Current public data
Laguna S 2.1 vs MiMo-V2.5
Live dataset updated 9/9/2026, 8:46:14 PM UTC
Open 1200×630 evidence receipt| Field | Laguna S 2.1 Poolside | MiMo-V2.5 Xiaomi |
|---|---|---|
| ModelCap position | #40 | #37 |
| Index score | 63.3 | 64.3 |
| Evidence | Estimated5 reported rows against measured corpus ladders (67%); global-corpus-prior over 182 held-out anchors (33%); shrunk 4.8 toward the measured corpus | Measured2 public benchmark observations across 2 boards |
| Input / 1M | $0.09 | $0.14 |
| Output / 1M | $0.18 | $0.28 |
| Pricing status | fresh | fresh |
| Context | 1M | 1M |
| Providers | 1 | 5 |
| Weight access | Restricted license | Open weights |
Decision facts
- Laguna S 2.1 is #40; MiMo-V2.5 is #37 on the same current language board.
- Index scores are 63.3 for Laguna S 2.1 and 64.3 for MiMo-V2.5. Their published uncertainty intervals overlap, so the rank difference alone does not establish a reliable capability advantage for your workload.
- Evidence differs: Laguna S 2.1 is Estimated; MiMo-V2.5 is Measured.
- Listed output price per 1M tokens is $0.18 for Laguna S 2.1 and $0.28 for MiMo-V2.5. For 1,000 requests with 2,000 input and 500 output tokens each (2M input + 0.5M output), the listed-rate estimate is $0.27 for Laguna S 2.1 versus $0.42 for MiMo-V2.5. Laguna S 2.1 costs 35.7% less in this scenario. This excludes caching, batch discounts, prompt-length tiers, tool charges and retries; verify the selected endpoint before budgeting.
- Published context is 1,048,576 tokens for Laguna S 2.1 and 1,050,000 for MiMo-V2.5.
- Weight access differs: Laguna S 2.1 is restricted; MiMo-V2.5 is open.
- ModelCap currently lists 1 providers for Laguna S 2.1 and 5 for MiMo-V2.5.
These are separate published fields, not a synthetic winner. ModelCap does not collapse price, access, context, and capability evidence into a hidden recommendation score.
Popular comparisons
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs GPT-6 Astra#2 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-6 Astra#3 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Muse Spark 1.3#3 vs #2 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5 vs GPT-6 Astra#4 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5 vs Muse Spark 1.3#4 vs #2 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Opus 5#3 vs #4 on the ModelCap Index
- GPT-5.6 Sol vs GPT-6 Astra#5 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs GPT-5.6 Sol#2 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-5.6 Sol#3 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol#4 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Kimi K3 vs GPT-6 Astra#6 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs Kimi K3#2 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Kimi K3#3 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5 vs Kimi K3#4 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- Kimi K3 vs GPT-5.6 Sol#6 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs GPT-6 Astra#7 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Muse Spark 1.3#7 vs #2 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash#3 vs #7 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash#4 vs #7 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs GPT-5.6 Sol#7 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Kimi K3#7 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- GPT-6 Astra vs GLM 5.3#1 vs #8 on the ModelCap Index
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs GLM 5.3#2 vs #8 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs GLM 5.3#3 vs #8 on the ModelCap Index
Each comparison page is a permanent, shareable URL with the same live figures as this tool: ModelCap Index position, API pricing, context window, provider count, weight access and every shared benchmark board.