Model comparison
Llama 2-70B vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 2-70B 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 math, where MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads 54.5 to 8.1.
Side by side
| Llama 2-70B | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 24.4 | 50.3 |
| Released | 2023-07-18 | 2026-09-21 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 1.05M |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.43 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.87 |
| Results tracked | 35 | 19 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Llama 2-70B: 31.4 (#286), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 55.5 (#23)
| Benchmark | Llama 2-70B | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1079 | 1534 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1629 |
| SciCode | — | 60.9% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,158 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Llama 2-70B: —, MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 37.5 (#35)
| Benchmark | Llama 2-70B | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 59.5% |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Llama 2-70B: 14.4 (#325), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.1 (#50)
| Benchmark | Llama 2-70B | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1073 | 1512 |
| CritPt | — | 26.6% |
| DTBench | 41.6% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 64.9% | — |
| CommonsenseQA 2.0 | 50% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 113.79 | — |
| ForecastBench | 51.4 | — |
| HellaSwag | 85.3% | — |
| LAMBADA | 78.9% | — |
| PIQA | 82.8% | — |
| WinoGrande | 80.2% | — |
Math MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Llama 2-70B: 8.1 (#326), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 54.5 (#45)
| Benchmark | Llama 2-70B | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1091 | 1494 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0% | — |
| ProofBench | — | 70% |
| MATH Level 5 | 3.3% | — |
| GSM8K | 69.6% | — |
Knowledge MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Llama 2-70B: 7.4 (#310), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.5 (#92)
| Benchmark | Llama 2-70B | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1039 | 1543 |
| GPQA Diamond | 26.3% | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 78.3% | — |
| BoolQ | 88.6% | — |
| MMLU | 69.9% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 60.2% | — |
| TriviaQA | 87.6% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Llama 2-70B: —, MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 40.8 (#43)
| Benchmark | Llama 2-70B | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1264 |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Llama 2-70B: 27.7 (#274), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 56.9 (#14)
| Benchmark | Llama 2-70B | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1045 | 1474 |
| LMArena Chinese | 995 | 1529 |
| LMArena Russian | 1083 | 1480 |
| LMArena French | 1090 | — |
| LMArena German | 1041 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 927 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 964 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1143 | — |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Llama 2-70B: 54.9 (#278), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 78.2 (#12)
| Benchmark | Llama 2-70B | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1071 | 1493 |
Long Context MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Llama 2-70B: 32.3 (#270), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 46.0 (#27)
| Benchmark | Llama 2-70B | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1062 | 1501 |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads
Llama 2-70B: 32.3 (#279), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 66.8 (#33)
| Benchmark | Llama 2-70B | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1115 | 1492 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1075 | 1468 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1088 | 1464 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 2-70B better than MiMo-V2.6-Pro?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Llama 2-70B or MiMo-V2.6-Pro better for coding?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 31.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Llama 2-70B and MiMo-V2.6-Pro share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 2-70B has 35 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 19.