Model comparison

Llama 2-13B 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 . 12 shared benchmarks.

Llama 2-13B Meta

29.6

Rank #309 Confirmed

MiMo-V2.6-Pro Xiaomi

50.3

Rank #49 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 2-13B scores higher in 0 categories and MiMo-V2.6-Pro in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads 66.8 to 29.8.

Side by side

Llama 2-13B and MiMo-V2.6-Pro specifications
Llama 2-13BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
ProviderMetaXiaomi
Noometry Index29.650.3
Released2023-07-182026-09-21
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—1.05M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.43
Output $ / M tokens—$0.87
Results tracked3219

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

Category by category

Coding MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Llama 2-13B: 30.9 (#291), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 55.5 (#23)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-13BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Coding10621534
LMArena WebDev—1629
SciCode—60.9%
ALE-Bench—1,158

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 2-13B: —, MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 37.5 (#35)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-13BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
APEX-Agents—59.5%

Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Llama 2-13B: 12.8 (#337), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.1 (#50)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-13BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Hard Prompts10511512
CritPt—26.6%
Chess Puzzles0%—
DTBench42.2%—
BIG-Bench Hard58.2%—
Epoch Capabilities Index106.17—
HellaSwag80.7%—
LAMBADA76.5%—
PIQA80.8%—
WinoGrande72.8%—

Math MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Llama 2-13B: 31.1 (#229), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 54.5 (#45)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-13BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Math10651494
ProofBench—70%
GSM8K36.9%—

Knowledge MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Llama 2-13B: 28.1 (#249), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.5 (#92)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-13BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Expert10301543
ARC (AI2) Challenge60.3%—
BoolQ82.4%—
MMLU55.6%—
OpenBookQA57%—
TriviaQA79.6%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Llama 2-13B: —, MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 40.8 (#43)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-13BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Vision—1264
ScienceQA55.8%—

Multilingual MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Llama 2-13B: 26.5 (#279), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 56.9 (#14)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-13BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Non-English10241474
LMArena Chinese10011529
LMArena Russian10551480
LMArena French1044—
LMArena German1009—
LMArena Japanese894—
LMArena Korean953—
LMArena Spanish1087—

Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Llama 2-13B: 53.3 (#287), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 78.2 (#12)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-13BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Instruction Following10451493

Long Context MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Llama 2-13B: 32.3 (#269), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 46.0 (#27)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-13BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Longer Query10641501

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Llama 2-13B: 29.8 (#289), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 66.8 (#33)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-13BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Text10841492
LMArena Creative Writing10471468
LMArena Multi-Turn10501464

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 2-13B 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 Llama 2-13B or MiMo-V2.6-Pro better for coding?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 30.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 2-13B and MiMo-V2.6-Pro share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 2-13B has 32 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 19.

Related comparisons

Go deeper