Model comparison

GLM-4.5V vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro

MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.2 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.5V Z.ai (Zhipu)

39.8

Rank #158 Confirmed

MiMo-V2.5-Pro Xiaomi

45.2

Rank #74 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.5V scores higher in 1 category and MiMo-V2.5-Pro in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads 65.3 to 52.5.
  • MiMo-V2.5-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $1.80 for GLM-4.5V.
  • MiMo-V2.5-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 64K.

Side by side

GLM-4.5V and MiMo-V2.5-Pro specifications
GLM-4.5VMiMo-V2.5-Pro
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Xiaomi
Noometry Index39.845.2
Released2025-08-112026-04-22
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window64K1.05M
Max output16K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.60$0.43
Output $ / M tokens$1.80$0.87
Results tracked1527

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

Category by category

Coding MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

GLM-4.5V: 39.5 (#155), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 47.4 (#60)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VMiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Coding13471503
LMArena WebDev—1479
SciCode—50.2%
ALE-Bench—899.8

Reasoning Too close to call

GLM-4.5V: 27.4 (#119), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 26.8 (#130)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VMiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Hard Prompts13341488
Kagi LLM Benchmark59.8%—
NYT Connections (extended)—34.4%
CritPt—4%
DTBench—84.5%
LMCA—29.5%

Math MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

GLM-4.5V: 37.4 (#159), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 40.0 (#96)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VMiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Math13541481
ProofBench—22%

Knowledge MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

GLM-4.5V: 37.5 (#156), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 42.2 (#98)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VMiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Expert13531503

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-4.5V: 34.3 (#92), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VMiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Vision1154—

Multilingual MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

GLM-4.5V: 44.6 (#177), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 55.1 (#34)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VMiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Non-English13031449
LMArena Chinese13371507
LMArena Russian12981450
LMArena Spanish13361471
LMArena French—1488
LMArena German—1458
LMArena Japanese—1412
LMArena Korean—1437

Instruction Following MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

GLM-4.5V: 69.2 (#175), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 77.5 (#21)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VMiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Instruction Following13111477

Long Context MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

GLM-4.5V: 39.6 (#171), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 45.4 (#37)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VMiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Longer Query13041483

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

GLM-4.5V: 52.5 (#170), MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 65.3 (#49)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VMiMo-V2.5-Pro
LMArena Text13331465
LMArena Creative Writing12951440
LMArena Multi-Turn13321477
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1493
EQ-Bench 4—1208

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.5V better than MiMo-V2.5-Pro?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.2 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.5V or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.43 per million input tokens and $0.87 per million output tokens; GLM-4.5V lists at $0.60 and $1.80.

Is GLM-4.5V or MiMo-V2.5-Pro better for coding?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.4 versus 39.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 64K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5V and MiMo-V2.5-Pro share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5V has 15 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.5-Pro has 27.

Related comparisons

Go deeper