Model comparison

Gemma 2B vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 2B Google

29.6

Rank #307 Confirmed

MiMo-V2.6-Pro Xiaomi

50.3

Rank #49 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2B scores higher in 0 categories and MiMo-V2.6-Pro in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads 66.8 to 24.0.

Side by side

Gemma 2B and MiMo-V2.6-Pro specifications
Gemma 2BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
ProviderGoogleXiaomi
Noometry Index29.650.3
Released2024-02-212026-09-21
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—1.05M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.43
Output $ / M tokens—$0.87
Results tracked2319

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

Category by category

Coding MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Gemma 2B: 29.4 (#305), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 55.5 (#23)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Coding10101534
LMArena WebDev—1629
SciCode—60.9%
ALE-Bench—1,158
HumanEval+20.7%—
MBPP+34.1%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

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

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
APEX-Agents—59.5%

Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Gemma 2B: 18.8 (#275), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.1 (#50)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Hard Prompts9891512
CritPt—26.6%
BIG-Bench Hard35.2%—
Epoch Capabilities Index94.2—
HellaSwag71.4%—
PIQA77.3%—
WinoGrande65.4%—

Math MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Gemma 2B: 30.0 (#239), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 54.5 (#45)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Math10091494
ProofBench—70%
GSM8K17.7%—

Knowledge Not comparable

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

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Expert—1543
ARC (AI2) Challenge42.1%—
BoolQ69.4%—
MMLU42.3%—
TriviaQA53.2%—

Multimodal Not comparable

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

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

Multilingual MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Gemma 2B: 23.0 (#294), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 56.9 (#14)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Non-English9581474
LMArena Chinese9861529
LMArena Russian9371480

Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Gemma 2B: 48.5 (#302), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 78.2 (#12)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Instruction Following9701493

Long Context MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Gemma 2B: 29.9 (#291), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 46.0 (#27)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Longer Query9811501

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Gemma 2B: 24.0 (#308), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 66.8 (#33)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Text10021492
LMArena Creative Writing9871468
LMArena Multi-Turn9451464

Frequently asked questions

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

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index.

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

MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 29.4 in the Noometry coding category.

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

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2B has 23 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 19.

Related comparisons

Go deeper