Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Flash vs MiMo-V2-Flash
MiMo-V2-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 39.3 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Flash scores higher in 4 categories and MiMo-V2-Flash in 4 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where MiMo-V2-Flash leads 24.9 to 18.1.
- MiMo-V2-Flash is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $2.50 for Gemini 2.5 Flash.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 262K.
- MiMo-V2-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.5 Flash | MiMo-V2-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | |
| Noometry Index | 39.3 | 41.3 |
| Released | 2025-04-17 | 2025-12-16 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 262K |
| Max output | 66K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $0.14 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.50 | $0.28 |
| Results tracked | 54 | 21 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 35.8 (#220), MiMo-V2-Flash: 36.1 (#211)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1424 | 1443 |
| ALE-Bench | 661.88 | 737.95 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 28.7% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 55.1% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1330 |
| SciCode | — | 25.9% |
| WeirdML | 41.9% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 30.8 (#74), MiMo-V2-Flash: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 17.1% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 56.2% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | 41.1% | — |
| BALROG | 33.5% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 548.84 | — |
Reasoning MiMo-V2-Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 18.1 (#286), MiMo-V2-Flash: 24.9 (#157)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 1.1% | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1422 | 1420 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 2.5% | — |
| SimpleBench | 41.2% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 56.8% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 33.3% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 2.7% | — |
| DTBench | 76.5% | — |
| LMCA | 27.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 143.03 | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.6 | — |
Math Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 39.9 (#98), MiMo-V2-Flash: 38.3 (#139)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1415 | 1396 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 73.1% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 38.5% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge MiMo-V2-Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 36.4 (#168), MiMo-V2-Flash: 39.7 (#131)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1426 | 1425 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 12.1% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 63.9% | — |
| Confabulations | 16.8% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.8% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 39% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 41.8 (#32), MiMo-V2-Flash: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1253 | — |
| GeoBench | 76% | — |
| VPCT | 46.2% | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 36.9% | — |
Multilingual Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 52.3 (#88), MiMo-V2-Flash: 51.0 (#113)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1409 | 1392 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1450 | 1462 |
| LMArena French | 1433 | 1429 |
| LMArena German | 1418 | 1395 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1405 | 1325 |
| LMArena Korean | 1385 | 1358 |
| LMArena Russian | 1415 | 1387 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1421 | 1420 |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 75.7 (#54), MiMo-V2-Flash: 73.5 (#120)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1405 | 1392 |
| IFEval | 89.8% | — |
Long Context Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 47.5 (#17), MiMo-V2-Flash: 43.0 (#110)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1419 | 1409 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 77.8% | — |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2-Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 53.8 (#157), MiMo-V2-Flash: 59.7 (#106)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1417 | 1411 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1400 | 1375 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1408 | 1404 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 76.5% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1137 | — |
| WildBench | 81.7% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash better than MiMo-V2-Flash?
MiMo-V2-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 39.3 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash or MiMo-V2-Flash?
MiMo-V2-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; Gemini 2.5 Flash lists at $0.30 and $2.50.
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash or MiMo-V2-Flash better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (35.8 vs 36.1); test both on your own repository before choosing.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Flash and MiMo-V2-Flash share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash has 54 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2-Flash has 21.