Model comparison

GLM-4.7-Flash vs MiMo-V2-Pro

MiMo-V2-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.0 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.7-Flash costs 3.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2-Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.7-Flash Z.ai (Zhipu)

38.8

Rank #180 Confirmed

MiMo-V2-Pro Xiaomi

43.0

Rank #103 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.7-Flash scores higher in 0 categories and MiMo-V2-Pro in 8 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2-Pro leads 62.8 to 47.4.
  • GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper at $0.06 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.43 / $0.87 for MiMo-V2-Pro.
  • MiMo-V2-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 200K.
  • GLM-4.7-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

GLM-4.7-Flash and MiMo-V2-Pro specifications
GLM-4.7-FlashMiMo-V2-Pro
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Xiaomi
Noometry Index38.843.0
Released2026-01-192026-03-18
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window200K1.05M
Max output131K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.06$0.43
Output $ / M tokens$0.40$0.87
Results tracked2123

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

Category by category

Coding MiMo-V2-Pro leads

GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.6 (#135), MiMo-V2-Pro: 43.8 (#83)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7-FlashMiMo-V2-Pro
LMArena Coding13831476
LMArena WebDev—1433
ALE-Bench—785.17

Reasoning MiMo-V2-Pro leads

GLM-4.7-Flash: 20.9 (#229), MiMo-V2-Pro: 22.1 (#206)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7-FlashMiMo-V2-Pro
LMArena Hard Prompts13561457
NYT Connections (extended)—25.8%
Chess Puzzles0%—
Thematic Generalization—45.9%

Math MiMo-V2-Pro leads

GLM-4.7-Flash: 36.1 (#173), MiMo-V2-Pro: 39.5 (#102)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7-FlashMiMo-V2-Pro
LMArena Math13551447
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202558.3%—

Knowledge MiMo-V2-Pro leads

GLM-4.7-Flash: 35.5 (#184), MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.4 (#111)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7-FlashMiMo-V2-Pro
LMArena Expert13571478
GPQA Diamond60.5%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate9.3%—

Multilingual MiMo-V2-Pro leads

GLM-4.7-Flash: 46.5 (#158), MiMo-V2-Pro: 52.7 (#81)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7-FlashMiMo-V2-Pro
LMArena Non-English13301416
LMArena Chinese14031456
LMArena French13321469
LMArena German13371417
LMArena Korean12831400
LMArena Russian13321427
LMArena Spanish13501457
LMArena Japanese—1366

Instruction Following MiMo-V2-Pro leads

GLM-4.7-Flash: 70.1 (#167), MiMo-V2-Pro: 76.0 (#49)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7-FlashMiMo-V2-Pro
LMArena Instruction Following13271445

Long Context Too close to call

GLM-4.7-Flash: 40.9 (#148), MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.5 (#138)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7-FlashMiMo-V2-Pro
LMArena Longer Query13451455
CL-bench—15.7%
CL-bench Life—6.9%

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2-Pro leads

GLM-4.7-Flash: 47.4 (#210), MiMo-V2-Pro: 62.8 (#70)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.7-FlashMiMo-V2-Pro
LMArena Text13511436
LMArena Creative Writing12971415
LMArena Multi-Turn13421456
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1125—

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.7-Flash better than MiMo-V2-Pro?

MiMo-V2-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.0 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.7-Flash costs 3.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2-Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.7-Flash or MiMo-V2-Pro?

GLM-4.7-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2-Pro lists at $0.43 and $0.87.

Is GLM-4.7-Flash or MiMo-V2-Pro better for coding?

MiMo-V2-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.8 versus 40.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.7-Flash and MiMo-V2-Pro share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.7-Flash has 21 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2-Pro has 23.

Related comparisons

Go deeper