Model comparison
Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.2 to 34.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores higher in 0 categories and MiMo-V2.5-Pro in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads 40.0 to 19.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 67.8% for Claude 3.5 Sonnet and 84.5% for MiMo-V2.5-Pro.
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude 3.5 Sonnet | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 34.6 | 45.2 |
| Released | 2024-06-20 | 2026-04-22 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 1.05M |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.43 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.87 |
| Results tracked | 60 | 27 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 39.0 (#165), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 47.4 (#60)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1342 | 1503 |
| Aider Polyglot | 51.6% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1479 |
| SciCode | — | 50.2% |
| GSO | 4.6% | — |
| WeirdML | 40% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 46.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 67.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 58.6% | — |
| CadEval | 48% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 899.8 |
| HumanEval+ | 81.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 74.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 32.3 (#67), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 24% | — |
| Cybench | 17.5% | — |
| BALROG | 32.6% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 45.2% | — |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 23.1 (#183), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 26.8 (#130)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1305 | 1488 |
| DTBench | 67.8% | 84.5% |
| SimpleBench | 41.4% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 34.4% |
| CritPt | — | 4% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.9% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 56.7% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 55% | — |
| LMCA | — | 29.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 133.55 | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.7 | — |
| LiveBench | 59% | — |
Math MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 19.2 (#288), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 40.0 (#96)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1307 | 1481 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 8.5% | — |
| ProofBench | — | 22% |
| Omni-MATH | 27.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 52.3% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 56.9% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 2.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 0% | — |
Knowledge MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 28.6 (#245), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 42.2 (#98)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1265 | 1503 |
| GPQA Diamond | 55.3% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 4.1% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 77.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 19.9% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 56.5% | — |
| MMLU | 87.3% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 26.5 (#120), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1125 | — |
| Video-MME | 60% | — |
| GeoBench | 62% | — |
| VPCT | 33% | — |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 43.2 (#185), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 55.1 (#34)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1283 | 1449 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1272 | 1507 |
| LMArena French | 1305 | 1488 |
| LMArena German | 1297 | 1458 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1234 | 1412 |
| LMArena Korean | 1200 | 1437 |
| LMArena Russian | 1306 | 1450 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1290 | 1471 |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 68.8 (#182), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 77.5 (#21)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1297 | 1477 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 69.3% | — |
| IFEval | 85.5% | — |
Long Context MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 39.9 (#167), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 45.4 (#37)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1311 | 1483 |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 52.9 (#164), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 65.3 (#49)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1298 | 1465 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1292 | 1440 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1451 | 1493 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1326 | 1477 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 80.3% | — |
| WildBench | 79.2% | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1208 |
| LiveBench Language | 53.8% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 3.5 Sonnet better than MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.2 to 34.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude 3.5 Sonnet or MiMo-V2.5-Pro better for coding?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.4 versus 39.0 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude 3.5 Sonnet and MiMo-V2.5-Pro share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3.5 Sonnet has 60 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.5-Pro has 27.