Model comparison

Mercury 2 vs MiMo-V2.5

MiMo-V2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.4 to 39.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.

Mercury 2 Inception

39.1

Rank #175 Confirmed

MiMo-V2.5 Xiaomi

43.4

Rank #93 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Mercury 2 scores higher in 0 categories and MiMo-V2.5 in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where MiMo-V2.5 leads 43.9 to 33.5.
  • MiMo-V2.5 is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $0.25 / $0.75 for Mercury 2.
  • MiMo-V2.5 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 128K.
  • MiMo-V2.5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Mercury 2 and MiMo-V2.5 specifications
Mercury 2MiMo-V2.5
ProviderInceptionXiaomi
Noometry Index39.143.4
Released2026-02-202026-04-22
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window128K1.05M
Max output50K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.25$0.14
Output $ / M tokens$0.75$0.28
Results tracked1723

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

Category by category

Coding MiMo-V2.5 leads

Mercury 2: 33.5 (#255), MiMo-V2.5: 43.9 (#81)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMercury 2MiMo-V2.5
LMArena WebDev11711438
SciCode38.7%43.1%
LMArena Coding13911469
ALE-Bench785.58513.95
WeirdML43.2%—

Reasoning MiMo-V2.5 leads

Mercury 2: 23.8 (#170), MiMo-V2.5: 28.6 (#101)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMercury 2MiMo-V2.5
CritPt0.8%3.7%
LMArena Hard Prompts13621450

Math Not comparable

Mercury 2: —, MiMo-V2.5: 36.8 (#163)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMercury 2MiMo-V2.5
ProofBench—16%
LMArena Math—1436

Knowledge MiMo-V2.5 leads

Mercury 2: 36.2 (#172), MiMo-V2.5: 40.8 (#115)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMercury 2MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Expert13581460
Vectara Hallucination Rate12.3%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Mercury 2: —, MiMo-V2.5: 39.8 (#54)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkMercury 2MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Vision—1247

Multilingual MiMo-V2.5 leads

Mercury 2: 46.6 (#157), MiMo-V2.5: 51.9 (#99)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMercury 2MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Non-English13311404
LMArena Chinese14171468
LMArena Russian13041395
LMArena French—1447
LMArena German—1421
LMArena Japanese—1306
LMArena Korean—1363
LMArena Spanish—1416

Instruction Following MiMo-V2.5 leads

Mercury 2: 70.2 (#165), MiMo-V2.5: 75.5 (#60)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMercury 2MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Instruction Following13291434

Long Context MiMo-V2.5 leads

Mercury 2: 40.5 (#154), MiMo-V2.5: 44.2 (#73)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMercury 2MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Longer Query13301445

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.5 leads

Mercury 2: 53.8 (#155), MiMo-V2.5: 61.6 (#86)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMercury 2MiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text13551428
LMArena Creative Writing12891393
LMArena Multi-Turn13581445

Frequently asked questions

Is Mercury 2 better than MiMo-V2.5?

MiMo-V2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.4 to 39.1 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Mercury 2 or MiMo-V2.5?

MiMo-V2.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; Mercury 2 lists at $0.25 and $0.75.

Is Mercury 2 or MiMo-V2.5 better for coding?

MiMo-V2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.9 versus 33.5 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 Mercury 2 and MiMo-V2.5 share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mercury 2 has 17 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.5 has 23.

Related comparisons

Go deeper