Model comparison
MiMo-V2.5-Pro vs Qwen1.5-7B
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.8 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.5-Pro scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-7B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads 65.5 to 29.8.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen1.5-7B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 44.8 | 30.8 |
| 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 | 13 |
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: 47.0 (#58), Qwen1.5-7B: 31.6 (#271)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1502 | 1107 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1477 | — |
| SciCode | 50.2% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 899.8 | — |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 25.9 (#124), Qwen1.5-7B: 19.5 (#237)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1487 | 1066 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 34.4% | — |
| CritPt | 4% | — |
| DTBench | 84.5% | — |
| LMCA | 29.5% | — |
Math MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 38.6 (#84), Qwen1.5-7B: 29.0 (#222)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1480 | 1080 |
| ProofBench | 22% | — |
Knowledge MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 41.5 (#100), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.2 (#239)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1501 | 1055 |
| MMLU | — | 62.6% |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 55.3 (#33), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.6 (#266)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1449 | 1058 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1507 | 1140 |
| LMArena Russian | 1450 | 1006 |
| LMArena French | 1489 | — |
| LMArena German | 1455 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1418 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1436 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1470 | — |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 77.6 (#21), Qwen1.5-7B: 54.4 (#276)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1477 | 1058 |
Long Context MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 45.4 (#38), Qwen1.5-7B: 33.1 (#261)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1482 | 1090 |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 65.5 (#47), Qwen1.5-7B: 29.8 (#288)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1465 | 1084 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1440 | 1035 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1477 | 1061 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1493 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1208 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2.5-Pro better than Qwen1.5-7B?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.8 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is MiMo-V2.5-Pro or Qwen1.5-7B better for coding?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.0 versus 31.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.5-Pro and Qwen1.5-7B share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.5-Pro has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-7B has 13.