Model comparison

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct vs MiMo-V2.5

MiMo-V2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.4 to 30.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct Meta

30.6

Rank #291 Confirmed

MiMo-V2.5 Xiaomi

43.4

Rank #93 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and MiMo-V2.5 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where MiMo-V2.5 leads 36.8 to 15.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 26% for Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct and 43.1% for MiMo-V2.5.
  • Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.32 per million input/output tokens, against $0.14 / $0.28 for MiMo-V2.5.
  • MiMo-V2.5 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 128K.

Side by side

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct and MiMo-V2.5 specifications
Llama-3.3-70B-InstructMiMo-V2.5
ProviderMetaXiaomi
Noometry Index30.643.4
Released2024-12-062026-04-22
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window128K1.05M
Max output4K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.10$0.14
Output $ / M tokens$0.32$0.28
Results tracked4323

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

Category by category

Coding MiMo-V2.5 leads

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 31.0 (#290), MiMo-V2.5: 43.9 (#81)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama-3.3-70B-InstructMiMo-V2.5
SciCode26%43.1%
LMArena Coding12681469
LMArena WebDev—1438
WeirdML14.4%—
BigCodeBench Instruct46.9%—
LiveBench Coding36.6%—
BigCodeBench Complete57.5%—
ALE-Bench—513.95

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 25.8 (#105), MiMo-V2.5: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama-3.3-70B-InstructMiMo-V2.5
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard31.9%—
BALROG23%—

Reasoning MiMo-V2.5 leads

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 14.1 (#327), MiMo-V2.5: 28.6 (#101)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama-3.3-70B-InstructMiMo-V2.5
CritPt0%3.7%
LMArena Hard Prompts12571450
SimpleBench19.9%—
LiveBench Reasoning50.8%—
DTBench59.5%—
LiveBench Data Analysis49.5%—
LMCA17.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index127.33—
ForecastBench58.6—
LiveBench50.2%—

Math MiMo-V2.5 leads

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 15.3 (#298), MiMo-V2.5: 36.8 (#163)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama-3.3-70B-InstructMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Math12671436
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20255.1%—
ProofBench—16%
LiveBench Math42.2%—
MATH Level 541.6%—

Knowledge MiMo-V2.5 leads

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 30.6 (#226), MiMo-V2.5: 40.8 (#115)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama-3.3-70B-InstructMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Expert12251460
GPQA Diamond47.4%—
Confabulations22.8%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate4.1%—
MMLU86.3%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: —, MiMo-V2.5: 39.8 (#54)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama-3.3-70B-InstructMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Vision—1247

Multilingual MiMo-V2.5 leads

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 39.9 (#220), MiMo-V2.5: 51.9 (#99)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama-3.3-70B-InstructMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Non-English12361404
LMArena Chinese12171468
LMArena French12811447
LMArena German12511421
LMArena Japanese11501306
LMArena Korean11431363
LMArena Russian12521395
LMArena Spanish12701416

Instruction Following MiMo-V2.5 leads

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 71.1 (#157), MiMo-V2.5: 75.5 (#60)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama-3.3-70B-InstructMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Instruction Following12421434
LiveBench Instruction Following82.7%—

Long Context MiMo-V2.5 leads

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 26.4 (#295), MiMo-V2.5: 44.2 (#73)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama-3.3-70B-InstructMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Longer Query12561445
Fiction.LiveBench33.3%—

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.5 leads

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 47.6 (#207), MiMo-V2.5: 61.6 (#86)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama-3.3-70B-InstructMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text12741428
LMArena Creative Writing12501393
LMArena Multi-Turn12801445
LiveBench Language39.2%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct better than MiMo-V2.5?

MiMo-V2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.4 to 30.6 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct or MiMo-V2.5?

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.32 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2.5 lists at $0.14 and $0.28.

Is Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct or MiMo-V2.5 better for coding?

MiMo-V2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.9 versus 31.0 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2.5 does, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct and MiMo-V2.5 share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct has 43 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.5 has 23.

Related comparisons

Go deeper