Model comparison
MiMo-V2.5-Pro vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.2 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2.5-Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.5-Pro scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct in 0 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads 40.0 to 12.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 84.5% for MiMo-V2.5-Pro and 47.7% for Qwen2.5 7B Instruct.
- Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper at $0.17 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $0.43 / $0.87 for MiMo-V2.5-Pro.
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 45.2 | 29.0 |
| Released | 2026-04-22 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 131K |
| Max output | 131K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.43 | $0.17 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.87 | $0.70 |
| Results tracked | 27 | 15 |
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), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 36.5 (#208)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1479 | — |
| SciCode | 50.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 37.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1503 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 46.1% |
| ALE-Bench | 899.8 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: —, Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.8 (#124)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | — | 7.8% |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 26.8 (#130), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.8 (#322)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 84.5% | 47.7% |
| LMCA | 29.5% | 6.4% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 34.4% | — |
| CritPt | 4% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1488 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 118.51 |
Math MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 40.0 (#96), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 12.6 (#306)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 2.5% |
| ProofBench | 22% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 29.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1481 | — |
Knowledge MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 42.2 (#98), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#286)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 35.5% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 53.9% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 34.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1503 | — |
| MMLU | — | 72.9% |
Multilingual Not comparable
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 55.1 (#34), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1449 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1507 | — |
| LMArena French | 1488 | — |
| LMArena German | 1458 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1412 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1437 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1450 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1471 | — |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 77.5 (#21), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.2 (#231)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | — | 74.1% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1477 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 45.4 (#37), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1483 | — |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 65.3 (#49), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#195)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen2.5 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1465 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1440 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1493 | — |
| WildBench | — | 73.1% |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1208 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1477 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2.5-Pro better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.2 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2.5-Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.5-Pro or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?
Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.17 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2.5-Pro lists at $0.43 and $0.87.
Is MiMo-V2.5-Pro or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.4 versus 36.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.5-Pro and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.5-Pro has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.