Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 2 27B vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 2 27B Google

29.4

Rank #312 Confirmed

MiMo-V2.6-Pro Xiaomi

50.3

Rank #49 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 27B scores higher in 0 categories and MiMo-V2.6-Pro in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads 54.5 to 10.7.
  • MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $0.65 / $0.65 for Gemma 2 27B.
  • MiMo-V2.6-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 8K.

Side by side

Gemma 2 27BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
ProviderGoogleXiaomi
Noometry Index29.450.3
Released2024-06-242026-09-21
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window8K1.05M
Max output2K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.65$0.43
Output $ / M tokens$0.65$0.87
Results tracked3419

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

Category by category

Coding MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Gemma 2 27B: 34.1 (#246), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 55.5 (#23)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Coding12111534
LMArena WebDev—1629
SciCode—60.9%
BigCodeBench Instruct42.8%—
LiveBench Coding36%—
BigCodeBench Complete52.5%—
ALE-Bench—1,158

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: —, MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 37.5 (#35)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
APEX-Agents—59.5%

Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Gemma 2 27B: 15.3 (#315), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.1 (#50)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Hard Prompts11981512
CritPt—26.6%
LiveBench Reasoning28.1%—
DTBench48%—
LiveBench Data Analysis47.9%—
LMCA7.1%—
Epoch Capabilities Index122.08—
LiveBench38.2%—

Math MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Gemma 2 27B: 10.7 (#311), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 54.5 (#45)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Math12121494
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.4%—
ProofBench—70%
LiveBench Math26.5%—
MATH Level 527.9%—

Knowledge MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Gemma 2 27B: 19.0 (#280), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.5 (#92)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Expert11721543
GPQA Diamond36.5%—
Confabulations27.1%—
MMLU75.7%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: —, MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 40.8 (#43)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Vision—1264

Multilingual MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Gemma 2 27B: 38.6 (#226), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 56.9 (#14)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Non-English12171474
LMArena Chinese12211529
LMArena Russian12341480
LMArena French1247—
LMArena German1209—
LMArena Japanese1175—
LMArena Korean1174—
LMArena Spanish1228—

Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Gemma 2 27B: 60.5 (#249), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 78.2 (#12)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Instruction Following12061493
LiveBench Instruction Following58.1%—

Long Context MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#218), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 46.0 (#27)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Longer Query12311501

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Gemma 2 27B: 44.2 (#225), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 66.8 (#33)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Text12311492
LMArena Creative Writing12411468
LMArena Multi-Turn12241464
LiveBench Language32.6%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 2 27B better than MiMo-V2.6-Pro?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or MiMo-V2.6-Pro?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.43 per million input tokens and $0.87 per million output tokens; Gemma 2 27B lists at $0.65 and $0.65.

Is Gemma 2 27B or MiMo-V2.6-Pro better for coding?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 34.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 8K.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 27B and MiMo-V2.6-Pro share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 27B has 34 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 19.

Related comparisons

Go deeper