Model comparison

DeepSeek-V3.1 vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro

MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.2 to 42.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek-V3.1 DeepSeek

42.8

Rank #108 Confirmed

MiMo-V2.5-Pro Xiaomi

45.2

Rank #74 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek-V3.1 scores higher in 2 categories and MiMo-V2.5-Pro in 6 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in long context, where MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads 45.4 to 36.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is LMCA: 24.3% for DeepSeek-V3.1 and 29.5% for MiMo-V2.5-Pro.
  • DeepSeek-V3.1 is cheaper at $0.25 / $0.95 per million input/output tokens, against $0.43 / $0.87 for MiMo-V2.5-Pro.
  • MiMo-V2.5-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 164K.

Side by side

DeepSeek-V3.1 and MiMo-V2.5-Pro specifications
DeepSeek-V3.1MiMo-V2.5-Pro
ProviderDeepSeekXiaomi
Noometry Index42.845.2
Released2025-08-212026-04-22
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window164K1.05M
Max output8K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.25$0.43
Output $ / M tokens$0.95$0.87
Results tracked2727

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 40.3 (#144), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 47.4 (#60)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Coding14171503
LMArena WebDev—1479
SciCode—50.2%
WeirdML38.4%—
ALE-Bench—899.8

Reasoning DeepSeek-V3.1 leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 27.9 (#110), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 26.8 (#130)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Hard Prompts14171488
DTBench82.7%84.5%
LMCA24.3%29.5%
SimpleBench40%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark53.2%—
NYT Connections (extended)—34.4%
CritPt—4%
Epoch Capabilities Index139.92—
ForecastBench58—

Math MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 38.9 (#122), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 40.0 (#96)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Math14201481
ProofBench—22%

Knowledge DeepSeek-V3.1 leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 43.7 (#90), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 42.2 (#98)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Expert14051503
Vectara Hallucination Rate5.5%—

Multilingual MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 51.6 (#106), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 55.1 (#34)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Non-English14001449
LMArena Chinese14691507
LMArena French14471488
LMArena German14111458
LMArena Japanese13781412
LMArena Korean13371437
LMArena Russian14051450
LMArena Spanish14311471

Instruction Following MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 73.9 (#110), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 77.5 (#21)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Instruction Following14001477

Long Context MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 36.3 (#232), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 45.4 (#37)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Longer Query14221483
Fiction.LiveBench52.8%—

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

DeepSeek-V3.1: 60.3 (#98), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 65.3 (#49)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.1MiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Text14201465
LMArena Creative Writing14011440
EQ-Bench Creative Writing14361493
LMArena Multi-Turn14081477
EQ-Bench 4—1208

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek-V3.1 better than MiMo-V2.5-Pro?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.2 to 42.8 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-V3.1 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?

DeepSeek-V3.1 is cheaper. It lists at $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.95 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2.5-Pro lists at $0.43 and $0.87.

Is DeepSeek-V3.1 or MiMo-V2.5-Pro better for coding?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.4 versus 40.3 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 164K.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V3.1 and MiMo-V2.5-Pro share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V3.1 has 27 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.5-Pro has 27.

Related comparisons

Go deeper