Model comparison

MiMo-V2.5-Pro vs Qwen2.5 Plus 1127

MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.2 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

MiMo-V2.5-Pro Xiaomi

45.2

Rank #74 Confirmed

Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 Alibaba (Qwen)

38.8

Rank #181 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.5-Pro scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads 65.3 to 49.4.
  • MiMo-V2.5-Pro has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

MiMo-V2.5-Pro and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 specifications
MiMo-V2.5-ProQwen2.5 Plus 1127
ProviderXiaomiAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index45.238.8
Released2026-04-22—
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1.05M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.43—
Output $ / M tokens$0.87—
Results tracked2714

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 Plus 1127: 38.5 (#175)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Coding15031314
LMArena WebDev1479—
SciCode50.2%—
ALE-Bench899.8—

Reasoning Too close to call

MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 26.8 (#130), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 25.9 (#141)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Hard Prompts14881299
NYT Connections (extended)34.4%—
CritPt4%—
DTBench84.5%—
LMCA29.5%—

Math MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 40.0 (#96), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 36.1 (#174)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Math14811298
ProofBench22%—

Knowledge MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 42.2 (#98), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 35.5 (#183)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Expert15031289

Multilingual MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 55.1 (#34), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 41.9 (#201)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Non-English14491265
LMArena Chinese15071314
LMArena German14581231
LMArena Japanese14121207
LMArena Russian14501271
LMArena French1488—
LMArena Korean1437—
LMArena Spanish1471—

Instruction Following MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 77.5 (#21), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.2 (#199)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Instruction Following14771275

Long Context MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 45.4 (#37), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#184)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Longer Query14831292

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 65.3 (#49), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.4 (#192)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen2.5 Plus 1127
LMArena Text14651299
LMArena Creative Writing14401262
LMArena Multi-Turn14771299
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1493—
EQ-Bench 41208—

Frequently asked questions

Is MiMo-V2.5-Pro better than Qwen2.5 Plus 1127?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.2 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is MiMo-V2.5-Pro or Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better for coding?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.4 versus 38.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.5-Pro and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.5-Pro has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14.

Related comparisons

Go deeper