Model Comparison
GPT-6.1 Sol vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed
GPT-6.1 Sol (max) leads MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on) by 217 Elo, and their 95% ranges sit 147 Elo apart. Among 78 models, each ranked by its best configuration, GPT-6.1 Sol is #9 and MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed is #17. Cost per script: $0.239 for GPT-6.1 Sol (max) and $0.177 for MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on).
Last updated , from board data generated at 01:13 UTC.
Picks and Verdict
PickGPT-6.1 Sol
GPT-6.1 Sol (low)
Pick GPT-6.1 Sol (low) when the budget is tight, since it rates above UltraSpeed for less than a third of the price, $0.052 a script.
PickMiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed
MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on)
Pick MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on) when speed is the constraint, since it returns a draft in about half a minute and edges every GPT-6.1 Sol setting on tone.
MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on) finishes a script in about half a minute, faster than anything else here. Every GPT-6.1 Sol setting still rates above it, and GPT-6.1 Sol (max) leads it by 217 Elo with separate 95% ranges. That's the #9 model of 78 against the #17 model, each ranked by its best setting. The part I find more useful is lower down. GPT-6.1 Sol (low) costs $0.052 a script, less than a third of UltraSpeed's $0.177, rates 102 Elo higher with separate ranges, and still finishes in 1.5 minutes. Medium and high rate above UltraSpeed too, but their ranges overlap it, so the board cannot separate those. Higher up, max buys 5 more Elo than xhigh for about a fifth more money, which I wouldn't pay. At max, Sol's lead comes mostly from substance, length and the slop score, each by more than four points. UltraSpeed edges it on tone and continuity, both by under a point. For a script I care about, I'd run Sol at xhigh, and I'd keep UltraSpeed for jobs where waiting is the real cost.
Disclosure: GPT-6.1 Sol comes from the same lab as one of the four judges, GPT-6.1 Sol. The other three sit outside its lab, so it is never scored by its own lab alone (how the panel works). The judge analysis measures how much each judge favors its own lab.
How to Read the Writing Score, Writing Elo and 95% Ranges
Writing Score and Writing Elo. The Writing Score (0 to 100) is the weighted average of the nine metric scores: seven from the judges, Length Adherence from code and the Slop Score half from each. The Writing Elo is a rating from pairwise comparisons: on each script, each configuration's average across its drafts is compared with every other configuration's, and gaps within the draft-to-draft variation count as draws. Elo rewards winning often, so the two can put configurations in a different order.
Elo ranges. Each 95% range shows how far a configuration's Elo could move if the drafts had come out slightly differently. It comes from resampling every configuration's recorded draft scores on each reference script and ranking again. Comparing two separate ranges does not test the Elo gap between them: ranges far apart are strong evidence for the order, and overlapping ranges do not mean a tie. The reference scripts stay fixed, so the ranges say nothing about new scripts. The methodology page has the full description.
All Thinking Levels of Both Models
Every ranked configuration of GPT-6.1 Sol and MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed, scored on the same 10 scripts by the same four judges.
- Each row is one configuration: the model at one thinking level. The dot is its Writing Elo, a rating from pairwise comparisons of the scores on each script, and the bar is its 95% range: how far that Elo could move if the drafts had come out slightly differently.
- When two bars overlap, the board cannot order those two configurations. Bars far apart are strong evidence for the order.
- The table under the chart lists the same configurations in the same order and adds the Writing Score (the 0 to 100 consensus of the judges and code), cost, time and configuration rank (the place among all configurations on the board).
Shaded rows are the configurations chosen for the metric comparison below.
| Configuration | Writing Elo | 95% Range | Writing Score | Cost / Script | Time / Script | Reasoning Tokens | Configuration Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPT-6.1 Sol (max) | 2214 | 2184 to 2248 | 82.4 | $0.239 | 10.2 min | N/A | #17 |
| GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh) | 2209 | 2161 to 2256 | 82.4 | $0.199 | 7.8 min | N/A | #19 |
| GPT-6.1 Sol (low) | 2099 | 2062 to 2133 | 81.4 | $0.052 | 1.5 min | N/A | #24 |
| GPT-6.1 Sol (high) | 2055 | 2018 to 2094 | 81.1 | $0.094 | 3.3 min | N/A | #26 |
| GPT-6.1 Sol (medium) | 2033 | 1995 to 2071 | 81.0 | $0.054 | 1.6 min | N/A | #29 |
| MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on) | 1997 | 1954 to 2037 | 80.6 | $0.177 | 0.5 min | 10,745 | #34 |
Cost is one script at the API list price of the route used, uncached and without judging. Time is the average for one accepted script, retries included. N/A under Reasoning Tokens means the board has no separate reasoning count for that route.
Computed Findings Across Thinking Levels
Each finding is computed from the configurations above. Where two 95% ranges overlap, the board cannot order those two configurations.
- Best Configurations Head to Head. GPT-6.1 Sol (max) leads MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on) by 217 Elo, and their 95% ranges do not overlap (2184 to 2248 against 1954 to 2037), which is strong evidence for that order.
- GPT-6.1 Sol at Its Lowest Thinking Level. GPT-6.1 Sol's lowest thinking level, GPT-6.1 Sol (low) at Elo 2099 and $0.052 per script, already ranks above MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed's best, MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on) at Elo 1997 and $0.177 per script. MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on) costs about 3.4 times as much per script.
- Cheapest Configuration Overlapping the Top One. GPT-6.1 Sol (xhigh), at $0.199 per script, is the cheapest configuration whose 95% range overlaps that of GPT-6.1 Sol (max), at $0.239 per script: 2161 to 2256 against 2184 to 2248, so the board cannot separate them. GPT-6.1 Sol (max) costs about 1.2 times as much per script.
- Lowest to Highest Thinking Level. GPT-6.1 Sol moves +115 Elo from low to max, at about 4.6 times the cost per script.
Two Chosen Configurations Compared
Pick one configuration of each model to compare their metric scores, consistency across drafts and per-script scores. Each menu starts on the model's best configuration.
Scores by Metric
GPT-6.1 Sol (max) scores higher on six of the nine metrics and MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on) on two, with one tie. Weighted by each metric's share of the Writing Score, Substance, Accuracy & Value does the most to put GPT-6.1 Sol (max) ahead, with a 4.6-point lead on that metric. The weight beside each metric is its share of the Writing Score.
Consistency Across Drafts
| GPT-6.1 Sol (max) | MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on) | |
|---|---|---|
| Score spread across drafts (±) | 1.40 | 1.87 |
| Lowest script score | 80.6 Script 10 | 78.5 Script 4 |
| Highest script score | 85.0 Script 9 | 82.3 Script 7 |
| Range across scripts | 4.4 | 3.8 |
Spread is how much the Writing Score moves between a configuration's drafts, and lower is steadier. Green marks the better number in each row.
Scores by Script
Writing Score on each reference script. Gap is GPT-6.1 Sol (max) minus MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on), and the higher score is in bold.
| Script | GPT-6.1 Sol (max) | MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on) | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Script 1 opinion / warning explainer | 81.7 | 79.0 | +2.7 |
| Script 2 news-analysis / skeptical explainer | 82.5 | 80.6 | +1.9 |
| Script 3 personal roadmap / opinion | 83.6 | 80.9 | +2.7 |
| Script 4 short explainer | 82.5 | 78.5 | +4.0 |
| Script 5 news-analysis / opinion explainer | 82.0 | 81.2 | +0.8 |
| Script 6 founder announcement / personal origin story | 83.3 | 81.2 | +2.1 |
| Script 7 personal technical walkthrough / agentic workflow case study | 82.2 | 82.3 | -0.1 |
| Script 8 product release announcement / personal observation | 81.0 | 81.3 | -0.3 |
| Script 9 career guide / hiring analysis | 85.0 | 82.3 | +2.7 |
| Script 10 engineering process walkthrough / presentation adaptation | 80.6 | 78.8 | +1.8 |
Scorecards and Thinking Pages
Each configuration name in the table above opens its own scorecard.
Compare With Another Model
Pick a second model. A pair with its own written match-up opens that page, and any other pair opens in the comparison tool.
Nearby Match-Ups by Best Writing Elo
Every configuration wrote five drafts for each of the same 10 briefs, from the same prompt. Generation was closed-book, with the prompt as the only source and no web search or other tools. Each judge scores every draft once: Claude Opus 5.5 at medium effort through the Claude Code subscription, GPT-6.1 Sol at medium reasoning through the Codex CLI, GLM 5.3 Flash through OpenRouter, and Jev 1.13, a typed judge from TypeSafe that answers each metric as a multiple-choice question. The channel's finished script is their reference for the voice, and it gets no score on the board itself.
← All comparisons