Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 2 27B vs MiMo-V2-Flash

MiMo-V2-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 2 27B Google

29.4

Rank #312 Confirmed

MiMo-V2-Flash Xiaomi

41.3

Rank #138 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 27B scores higher in 0 categories and MiMo-V2-Flash in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where MiMo-V2-Flash leads 38.3 to 10.7.
  • MiMo-V2-Flash is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $0.65 / $0.65 for Gemma 2 27B.
  • MiMo-V2-Flash accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 8K.

Side by side

Gemma 2 27BMiMo-V2-Flash
ProviderGoogleXiaomi
Noometry Index29.441.3
Released2024-06-242025-12-16
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window8K262K
Max output2K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.65$0.14
Output $ / M tokens$0.65$0.28
Results tracked3421

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

Category by category

Coding MiMo-V2-Flash leads

Gemma 2 27B: 34.1 (#246), MiMo-V2-Flash: 36.1 (#211)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2-Flash
LMArena Coding12111443
LMArena WebDev—1330
SciCode—25.9%
BigCodeBench Instruct42.8%—
LiveBench Coding36%—
BigCodeBench Complete52.5%—
ALE-Bench—737.95

Reasoning MiMo-V2-Flash leads

Gemma 2 27B: 15.3 (#315), MiMo-V2-Flash: 24.9 (#157)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2-Flash
LMArena Hard Prompts11981420
CritPt—0%
LiveBench Reasoning28.1%—
DTBench48%—
LiveBench Data Analysis47.9%—
LMCA7.1%—
Epoch Capabilities Index122.08—
LiveBench38.2%—

Math MiMo-V2-Flash leads

Gemma 2 27B: 10.7 (#311), MiMo-V2-Flash: 38.3 (#139)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2-Flash
LMArena Math12121396
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.4%—
LiveBench Math26.5%—
MATH Level 527.9%—

Knowledge MiMo-V2-Flash leads

Gemma 2 27B: 19.0 (#280), MiMo-V2-Flash: 39.7 (#131)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2-Flash
LMArena Expert11721425
GPQA Diamond36.5%—
Confabulations27.1%—
MMLU75.7%—

Multilingual MiMo-V2-Flash leads

Gemma 2 27B: 38.6 (#226), MiMo-V2-Flash: 51.0 (#113)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2-Flash
LMArena Non-English12171392
LMArena Chinese12211462
LMArena French12471429
LMArena German12091395
LMArena Japanese11751325
LMArena Korean11741358
LMArena Russian12341387
LMArena Spanish12281420

Instruction Following MiMo-V2-Flash leads

Gemma 2 27B: 60.5 (#249), MiMo-V2-Flash: 73.5 (#120)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following12061392
LiveBench Instruction Following58.1%—

Long Context MiMo-V2-Flash leads

Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#218), MiMo-V2-Flash: 43.0 (#110)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2-Flash
LMArena Longer Query12311409

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2-Flash leads

Gemma 2 27B: 44.2 (#225), MiMo-V2-Flash: 59.7 (#106)

BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2-Flash
LMArena Text12311411
LMArena Creative Writing12411375
LMArena Multi-Turn12241404
LiveBench Language32.6%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 2 27B better than MiMo-V2-Flash?

MiMo-V2-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B 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; Gemma 2 27B lists at $0.65 and $0.65.

Is Gemma 2 27B or MiMo-V2-Flash better for coding?

MiMo-V2-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.1 versus 34.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2-Flash does, with 262K tokens against 8K.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 27B and MiMo-V2-Flash share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 27B has 34 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2-Flash has 21.

Related comparisons

Go deeper