Model comparison

Llama 3.1-405B vs MiMo-V2.5

MiMo-V2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.4 to 30.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

Llama 3.1-405B Meta

30.7

Rank #288 Confirmed

MiMo-V2.5 Xiaomi

43.4

Rank #93 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.1-405B scores higher in 0 categories and MiMo-V2.5 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2.5 leads 61.6 to 38.9.

Side by side

Llama 3.1-405B and MiMo-V2.5 specifications
Llama 3.1-405BMiMo-V2.5
ProviderMetaXiaomi
Noometry Index30.743.4
Released2024-07-232026-04-22
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window—1.05M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.14
Output $ / M tokens—$0.28
Results tracked4223

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

Category by category

Coding MiMo-V2.5 leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 33.1 (#262), MiMo-V2.5: 43.9 (#81)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Coding12911469
LMArena WebDev—1438
SciCode—43.1%
WeirdML21.4%—
ALE-Bench—513.95

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 3.1-405B: 21.0 (#140), MiMo-V2.5: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BMiMo-V2.5
TheAgentCompany7.4%—
Cybench7.5%—

Reasoning MiMo-V2.5 leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 16.8 (#300), MiMo-V2.5: 28.6 (#101)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Hard Prompts12691450
SimpleBench23%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark45%—
CritPt—3.7%
DTBench61.4%—
BIG-Bench Hard82.9%—
Epoch Capabilities Index128.75—
ForecastBench59.9—
HellaSwag89.2%—
PIQA85.9%—
WinoGrande89.2%—

Math MiMo-V2.5 leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 18.4 (#290), MiMo-V2.5: 36.8 (#163)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Math12811436
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20259.7%—
ProofBench—16%
Omni-MATH24.9%—
MATH Level 549.8%—

Knowledge MiMo-V2.5 leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 30.4 (#227), MiMo-V2.5: 40.8 (#115)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Expert12431460
GPQA Diamond50.9%—
MMLU-Pro72.3%—
Confabulations17.6%—
GPQA (HELM)52.2%—
ARC (AI2) Challenge95.3%—
MMLU84.5%—
TriviaQA82.7%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Llama 3.1-405B: —, MiMo-V2.5: 39.8 (#54)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Vision—1247

Multilingual MiMo-V2.5 leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 40.7 (#214), MiMo-V2.5: 51.9 (#99)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Non-English12481404
LMArena Chinese12421468
LMArena French12791447
LMArena German12521421
LMArena Japanese12081306
LMArena Korean11841363
LMArena Russian12651395
LMArena Spanish12601416

Instruction Following MiMo-V2.5 leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 65.9 (#214), MiMo-V2.5: 75.5 (#60)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Instruction Following12591434
IFEval81.1%—

Long Context MiMo-V2.5 leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 38.4 (#197), MiMo-V2.5: 44.2 (#73)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Longer Query12661445

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.5 leads

Llama 3.1-405B: 38.9 (#251), MiMo-V2.5: 61.6 (#86)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-405BMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text12841428
LMArena Creative Writing12621393
LMArena Multi-Turn12971445
EQ-Bench Creative Writing870—
WildBench78.3%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 3.1-405B better than MiMo-V2.5?

MiMo-V2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.4 to 30.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is Llama 3.1-405B or MiMo-V2.5 better for coding?

MiMo-V2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.9 versus 33.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 3.1-405B and MiMo-V2.5 share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.1-405B has 42 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.5 has 23.

Related comparisons

Go deeper