Model comparison

MiMo-V2.5-Pro vs Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct

MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.2 to 29.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

MiMo-V2.5-Pro Xiaomi

45.2

Rank #74 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads 26.8 to 20.7.
  • MiMo-V2.5-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $2.80 / $8.40 for Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct.
  • MiMo-V2.5-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.

Side by side

MiMo-V2.5-Pro and Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct specifications
MiMo-V2.5-ProQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
ProviderXiaomiAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index45.229.9
Released2026-04-222024-09
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1.05M131K
Max output131K8K
Input $ / M tokens$0.43$2.80
Output $ / M tokens$0.87$8.40
Results tracked276

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 47.4 (#60), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena WebDev1479—
SciCode50.2%—
LMArena Coding1503—
ALE-Bench899.8—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

MiMo-V2.5-Pro: —, Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: 18.6 (#144)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
OSWorld—5%

Reasoning MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 26.8 (#130), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: 20.7 (#233)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
Kagi LLM Benchmark—36%
NYT Connections (extended)34.4%—
CritPt4%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1488—
DTBench84.5%—
LMCA29.5%—

Math Not comparable

MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 40.0 (#96), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
ProofBench22%—
LMArena Math1481—

Knowledge Not comparable

MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 42.2 (#98), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Expert1503—

Multimodal Not comparable

MiMo-V2.5-Pro: —, Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: 33.5 (#97)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Vision—1107
Video-MME—73.5%
GeoBench—62%
SpatialViz-Bench—33.3%

Multilingual Not comparable

MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 55.1 (#34), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Non-English1449—
LMArena Chinese1507—
LMArena French1488—
LMArena German1458—
LMArena Japanese1412—
LMArena Korean1437—
LMArena Russian1450—
LMArena Spanish1471—

Instruction Following Not comparable

MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 77.5 (#21), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following1477—

Long Context Not comparable

MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 45.4 (#37), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Longer Query1483—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 65.3 (#49), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Text1465—
LMArena Creative Writing1440—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1493—
EQ-Bench 41208—
LMArena Multi-Turn1477—

Frequently asked questions

Is MiMo-V2.5-Pro better than Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.2 to 29.9 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.5-Pro or Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.43 per million input tokens and $0.87 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct lists at $2.80 and $8.40.

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-VL 72B Instruct share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.5-Pro has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct has 6.

Related comparisons

Go deeper