Model comparison
Claude 2.1 vs MiMo-V2-Flash
MiMo-V2-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where MiMo-V2-Flash leads 38.3 to 10.2.
- MiMo-V2-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude 2.1 | MiMo-V2-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 25.2 | 41.3 |
| Released | 2023-11-21 | 2025-12-16 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.14 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.28 |
| Results tracked | 7 | 21 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2-Flash leads
Claude 2.1: 26.2 (#327), MiMo-V2-Flash: 36.1 (#211)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1330 |
| SciCode | — | 25.9% |
| WeirdML | 7.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1443 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 737.95 |
Reasoning MiMo-V2-Flash leads
Claude 2.1: 21.4 (#221), MiMo-V2-Flash: 24.9 (#157)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1420 |
| DTBench | 51% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.27 | — |
| ForecastBench | 54.2 | — |
Math MiMo-V2-Flash leads
Claude 2.1: 10.2 (#315), MiMo-V2-Flash: 38.3 (#139)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.9% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1396 |
Knowledge MiMo-V2-Flash leads
Claude 2.1: 15.4 (#292), MiMo-V2-Flash: 39.7 (#131)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 33% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1425 |
| MMLU | 73.5% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, MiMo-V2-Flash: 51.0 (#113)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1392 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1462 |
| LMArena French | — | 1429 |
| LMArena German | — | 1395 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1325 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1358 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1387 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1420 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, MiMo-V2-Flash: 73.5 (#120)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1392 |
Long Context Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, MiMo-V2-Flash: 43.0 (#110)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1409 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, MiMo-V2-Flash: 59.7 (#106)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1411 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1375 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1404 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 2.1 better than MiMo-V2-Flash?
MiMo-V2-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 25.2 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude 2.1 or MiMo-V2-Flash better for coding?
MiMo-V2-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.1 versus 26.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude 2.1 and MiMo-V2-Flash share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 2.1 has 7 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2-Flash has 21.