Model comparison

Llama 2-7B vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Llama 2-7B Meta

29.1

Rank #317 Confirmed

MiMo-V2.6-Pro Xiaomi

50.3

Rank #49 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 2-7B 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 28.0.

Side by side

Llama 2-7B and MiMo-V2.6-Pro specifications
Llama 2-7BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
ProviderMetaXiaomi
Noometry Index29.150.3
Released2023-07-182026-09-21
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—1.05M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.43
Output $ / M tokens—$0.87
Results tracked2919

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

Category by category

Coding MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Llama 2-7B: 29.2 (#307), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 55.5 (#23)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Coding10021534
LMArena WebDev—1629
SciCode—60.9%
ALE-Bench—1,158

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 2-7B: —, MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 37.5 (#35)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
APEX-Agents—59.5%

Reasoning MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Llama 2-7B: 15.7 (#312), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.1 (#50)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Hard Prompts10091512
CritPt—26.6%
Chess Puzzles0%—
BIG-Bench Hard39.2%—
Epoch Capabilities Index99.06—
HellaSwag77.2%—
LAMBADA73.3%—
PIQA78.8%—
WinoGrande69.2%—

Math MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Llama 2-7B: 30.7 (#233), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 54.5 (#45)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Math10421494
ProofBench—70%
GSM8K16.7%—

Knowledge MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Llama 2-7B: 28.2 (#248), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.5 (#92)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Expert10361543
ARC (AI2) Challenge45.9%—
BoolQ77.9%—
MMLU45.8%—
OpenBookQA58.6%—
TriviaQA73.7%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Llama 2-7B: —, MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 40.8 (#43)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Vision—1264
ScienceQA43.1%—

Multilingual MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Llama 2-7B: 23.8 (#293), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 56.9 (#14)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Non-English9731474
LMArena Chinese9731529
LMArena Russian9951480
LMArena French970—
LMArena German978—
LMArena Spanish1007—

Instruction Following MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Llama 2-7B: 50.8 (#298), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 78.2 (#12)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Instruction Following10061493

Long Context MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Llama 2-7B: 30.4 (#287), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 46.0 (#27)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Longer Query9991501

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads

Llama 2-7B: 28.0 (#298), MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 66.8 (#33)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 2-7BMiMo-V2.6-Pro
LMArena Text10531492
LMArena Creative Writing10331468
LMArena Multi-Turn10291464

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 2-7B better than MiMo-V2.6-Pro?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is Llama 2-7B or MiMo-V2.6-Pro better for coding?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 55.5 versus 29.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 2-7B and MiMo-V2.6-Pro share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 2-7B has 29 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 19.

Related comparisons

Go deeper