Model comparison
MiMo-V2.5-Pro vs Qwen1.5-14B
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.2 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.5-Pro scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-14B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads 65.3 to 33.6.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen1.5-14B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 45.2 | 32.7 |
| Released | 2026-04-22 | 2024-02-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | — |
| Max output | 131K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.43 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.87 | — |
| Results tracked | 27 | 17 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 47.4 (#60), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.1 (#263)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1503 | 1138 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1479 | — |
| SciCode | 50.2% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 899.8 | — |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 26.8 (#130), Qwen1.5-14B: 21.4 (#223)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1488 | 1113 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 34.4% | — |
| CritPt | 4% | — |
| DTBench | 84.5% | — |
| LMCA | 29.5% | — |
Math MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 40.0 (#96), Qwen1.5-14B: 32.4 (#215)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1481 | 1125 |
| ProofBench | 22% | — |
Knowledge MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 42.2 (#98), Qwen1.5-14B: 29.8 (#232)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1503 | 1094 |
| MMLU | — | 68.6% |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 55.1 (#34), Qwen1.5-14B: 30.7 (#262)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1449 | 1095 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1507 | 1147 |
| LMArena French | 1488 | 1116 |
| LMArena German | 1458 | 1043 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1412 | 1019 |
| LMArena Russian | 1450 | 1046 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1471 | 1085 |
| LMArena Korean | 1437 | — |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 77.5 (#21), Qwen1.5-14B: 56.8 (#271)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1477 | 1102 |
Long Context MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 45.4 (#37), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.7 (#257)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1483 | 1113 |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 65.3 (#49), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.6 (#276)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1465 | 1128 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1440 | 1091 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1477 | 1110 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1493 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1208 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2.5-Pro better than Qwen1.5-14B?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.2 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is MiMo-V2.5-Pro or Qwen1.5-14B better for coding?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.4 versus 33.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.5-Pro and Qwen1.5-14B share?
16 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.5-Pro has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-14B has 17.