Model comparison
Mercury 2.5 vs MiMo-V2-Omni
MiMo-V2-Omni is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.6 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index. Mercury 2.5 costs 2.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2-Omni's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where MiMo-V2-Omni leads 39.1 to 23.3.
- Mercury 2.5 is cheaper at $0.04 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $0.14 / $0.28 for MiMo-V2-Omni.
- MiMo-V2-Omni accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 260K.
Side by side
| Mercury 2.5 | MiMo-V2-Omni | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 33.5 | 43.6 |
| Released | 2026-09-08 | 2026-03-18 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 260K | 262K |
| Max output | 66K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.04 | $0.14 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.15 | $0.28 |
| Results tracked | 4 | 18 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2-Omni leads
Mercury 2.5: 39.5 (#156), MiMo-V2-Omni: 43.3 (#89)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | MiMo-V2-Omni |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 38.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1466 |
| ALE-Bench | 301.65 | — |
Reasoning MiMo-V2-Omni leads
Mercury 2.5: 22.4 (#193), MiMo-V2-Omni: 29.7 (#88)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | MiMo-V2-Omni |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1445 |
Math MiMo-V2-Omni leads
Mercury 2.5: 23.3 (#272), MiMo-V2-Omni: 39.1 (#115)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | MiMo-V2-Omni |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 3% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1430 |
Knowledge Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, MiMo-V2-Omni: 40.5 (#118)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | MiMo-V2-Omni |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1449 |
Multimodal Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, MiMo-V2-Omni: 38.6 (#63)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | MiMo-V2-Omni |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1228 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, MiMo-V2-Omni: 51.8 (#102)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | MiMo-V2-Omni |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1404 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1465 |
| LMArena French | — | 1447 |
| LMArena German | — | 1399 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1317 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1355 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1412 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1434 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, MiMo-V2-Omni: 75.2 (#66)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | MiMo-V2-Omni |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1428 |
Long Context Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, MiMo-V2-Omni: 44.1 (#76)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | MiMo-V2-Omni |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1442 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, MiMo-V2-Omni: 61.4 (#87)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | MiMo-V2-Omni |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1423 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1392 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1445 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Mercury 2.5 better than MiMo-V2-Omni?
MiMo-V2-Omni is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.6 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index. Mercury 2.5 costs 2.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2-Omni's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Mercury 2.5 or MiMo-V2-Omni?
Mercury 2.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.04 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2-Omni lists at $0.14 and $0.28.
Is Mercury 2.5 or MiMo-V2-Omni better for coding?
MiMo-V2-Omni scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.3 versus 39.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2-Omni does, with 262K tokens against 260K.
How many benchmarks do Mercury 2.5 and MiMo-V2-Omni share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mercury 2.5 has 4 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2-Omni has 18.