Model comparison
GLM-5.1 vs MiMo-V2.5
GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 43.4 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2.5 costs 12× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.1 scores higher in 8 categories and MiMo-V2.5 in 0 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-5.1 leads 54.9 to 40.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 22.2% for GLM-5.1 and 16% for MiMo-V2.5.
- MiMo-V2.5 is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $1.40 / $4.40 for GLM-5.1.
- MiMo-V2.5 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 200K.
Side by side
| GLM-5.1 | MiMo-V2.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 47.8 | 43.4 |
| Released | 2026-04-07 | 2026-04-22 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 200K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 131K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.40 | $0.14 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $4.40 | $0.28 |
| Results tracked | 41 | 23 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 48.7 (#55), MiMo-V2.5: 43.9 (#81)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1508 | 1438 |
| SciCode | 43.8% | 43.1% |
| LMArena Coding | 1485 | 1469 |
| ALE-Bench | 887.1 | 513.95 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 74.2% | — |
| WeirdML | 57.1% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GLM-5.1: 24.9 (#113), MiMo-V2.5: —
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 40.9% | — |
| ExploitBench | 18.1% | — |
| GBAEval | 0% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,634 | — |
Reasoning GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 39.1 (#60), MiMo-V2.5: 28.6 (#101)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 4.6% | 3.7% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1472 | 1450 |
| SimpleBench | 55.1% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 77.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 19% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 69.8% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 149.84 | — |
Math GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 49.7 (#60), MiMo-V2.5: 36.8 (#163)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 22.2% | 16% |
| LMArena Math | 1473 | 1436 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 36.8% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 67.1% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 93.3% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 33.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 12.5% | — |
Knowledge GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 54.9 (#50), MiMo-V2.5: 40.8 (#115)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1476 | 1460 |
| GPQA Diamond | 89.9% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 34% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-5.1: —, MiMo-V2.5: 39.8 (#54)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1247 |
Multilingual GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#36), MiMo-V2.5: 51.9 (#99)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1447 | 1404 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1515 | 1468 |
| LMArena French | 1474 | 1447 |
| LMArena German | 1465 | 1421 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1434 | 1306 |
| LMArena Korean | 1418 | 1363 |
| LMArena Russian | 1454 | 1395 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1469 | 1416 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
GLM-5.1: 76.3 (#42), MiMo-V2.5: 75.5 (#60)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1451 | 1434 |
Long Context Too close to call
GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#53), MiMo-V2.5: 44.2 (#73)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1466 | 1445 |
Writing & Preference GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 66.9 (#31), MiMo-V2.5: 61.6 (#86)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1461 | 1428 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1453 | 1393 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1472 | 1445 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1592 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-5.1 better than MiMo-V2.5?
GLM-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.8 to 43.4 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2.5 costs 12× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GLM-5.1 or MiMo-V2.5?
MiMo-V2.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; GLM-5.1 lists at $1.40 and $4.40.
Is GLM-5.1 or MiMo-V2.5 better for coding?
GLM-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.7 versus 43.9 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.5 does, with 1.05M tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do GLM-5.1 and MiMo-V2.5 share?
22 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.1 has 41 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.5 has 23.