Model comparison
Grok 4.7 vs MiMo-V2-Flash
Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.1 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2-Flash costs 17× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Grok 4.7 scores higher in 7 categories and MiMo-V2-Flash in 1 category; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.7 leads 49.1 to 24.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 57.8% for Grok 4.7 and 25.9% for MiMo-V2-Flash.
- MiMo-V2-Flash is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Grok 4.7.
- Grok 4.7 accepts more context: 500K tokens versus 262K.
- MiMo-V2-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Grok 4.7 | MiMo-V2-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | xAI | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 53.1 | 41.3 |
| Released | 2026-09-21 | 2025-12-16 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 500K | 262K |
| Max output | 500K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | $0.14 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $6 | $0.28 |
| Results tracked | 39 | 21 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.7 leads
Grok 4.7: 58.0 (#18), MiMo-V2-Flash: 36.1 (#211)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1639 | 1330 |
| SciCode | 57.8% | 25.9% |
| LMArena Coding | 1427 | 1443 |
| FrontierCode | 47.6% | — |
| CursorBench | 46.3% | — |
| FrontierSWE | 29.5% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 737.95 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Grok 4.7: 36.7 (#37), MiMo-V2-Flash: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 54.6% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 22.8% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 10,537 | — |
Reasoning Grok 4.7 leads
Grok 4.7: 49.1 (#40), MiMo-V2-Flash: 24.9 (#157)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 18% | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1413 | 1420 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 76.8% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 38% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 29% | — |
| DTBench | 96% | — |
| LMCA | 49.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 153.53 | — |
Math Grok 4.7 leads
Grok 4.7: 57.8 (#39), MiMo-V2-Flash: 38.3 (#139)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1407 | 1396 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 53% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 17.1% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.1% | — |
| ProofBench | 34% | — |
Knowledge Grok 4.7 leads
Grok 4.7: 62.8 (#22), MiMo-V2-Flash: 39.7 (#131)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1422 | 1425 |
| GPQA Diamond | 92.7% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 56% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Grok 4.7: 35.5 (#87), MiMo-V2-Flash: —
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1228 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 32.5% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 20.8% | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
Grok 4.7: 50.8 (#116), MiMo-V2-Flash: 51.0 (#113)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1389 | 1392 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1455 | 1462 |
| LMArena French | 1455 | 1429 |
| LMArena Russian | 1397 | 1387 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1400 | 1420 |
| LMArena German | — | 1395 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1325 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1358 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Grok 4.7: 74.1 (#105), MiMo-V2-Flash: 73.5 (#120)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1404 | 1392 |
Long Context Too close to call
Grok 4.7: 43.1 (#104), MiMo-V2-Flash: 43.0 (#110)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1413 | 1409 |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.7 leads
Grok 4.7: 70.0 (#24), MiMo-V2-Flash: 59.7 (#106)
| Benchmark | Grok 4.7 | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1399 | 1411 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1391 | 1375 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1393 | 1404 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2007 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Grok 4.7 better than MiMo-V2-Flash?
Grok 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 53.1 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2-Flash costs 17× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.7 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; Grok 4.7 lists at $2 and $6.
Is Grok 4.7 or MiMo-V2-Flash better for coding?
Grok 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 58.0 versus 36.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Grok 4.7 does, with 500K tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do Grok 4.7 and MiMo-V2-Flash share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Grok 4.7 has 39 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2-Flash has 21.