Model comparison
Llama 3.2 3B vs MiMo-V2.5
MiMo-V2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.4 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.2 3B 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 24.7.
- Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.33 per million input/output tokens, against $0.14 / $0.28 for MiMo-V2.5.
- MiMo-V2.5 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
Side by side
| Llama 3.2 3B | MiMo-V2.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 28.9 | 43.4 |
| Released | 2024-09-24 | 2026-04-22 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 131K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 118K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.05 | $0.14 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.33 | $0.28 |
| Results tracked | 18 | 23 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2.5 leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 27.6 (#319), MiMo-V2.5: 43.9 (#81)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1098 | 1469 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1438 |
| SciCode | — | 43.1% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 23.4% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 28.3% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 513.95 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#143), MiMo-V2.5: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 21.9% | — |
| BALROG | 10.1% | — |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.5 leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 21.0 (#228), MiMo-V2.5: 28.6 (#101)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1095 | 1450 |
| CritPt | — | 3.7% |
Math MiMo-V2.5 leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 32.4 (#214), MiMo-V2.5: 36.8 (#163)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1126 | 1436 |
| ProofBench | — | 16% |
Knowledge MiMo-V2.5 leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 29.7 (#235), MiMo-V2.5: 40.8 (#115)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1090 | 1460 |
Multimodal Not comparable
Llama 3.2 3B: —, MiMo-V2.5: 39.8 (#54)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1247 |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.5 leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 26.2 (#281), MiMo-V2.5: 51.9 (#99)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1019 | 1404 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1017 | 1468 |
| LMArena German | 1056 | 1421 |
| LMArena Russian | 949 | 1395 |
| LMArena French | — | 1447 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1306 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1363 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1416 |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.5 leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 56.0 (#275), MiMo-V2.5: 75.5 (#60)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1089 | 1434 |
Long Context MiMo-V2.5 leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#261), MiMo-V2.5: 44.2 (#73)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1100 | 1445 |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.5 leads
Llama 3.2 3B: 24.7 (#307), MiMo-V2.5: 61.6 (#86)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1110 | 1428 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1094 | 1393 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1105 | 1445 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 595 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 3.2 3B better than MiMo-V2.5?
MiMo-V2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.4 to 28.9 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Llama 3.2 3B or MiMo-V2.5?
Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.33 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2.5 lists at $0.14 and $0.28.
Is Llama 3.2 3B or MiMo-V2.5 better for coding?
MiMo-V2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.9 versus 27.6 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.5 does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 3B and MiMo-V2.5 share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 3B has 18 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.5 has 23.