Noometry

Model comparison

MiMo-V2.5-Pro vs Qwen3.5 35B-A3B

MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.8 to 41.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.

MiMo-V2.5-Pro Xiaomi

44.8

Rank #70 Confirmed

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Alibaba (Qwen)

41.7

Rank #118 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.5-Pro scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen3.5 35B-A3B in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads 47.0 to 33.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 50.2% for MiMo-V2.5-Pro and 29.3% for Qwen3.5 35B-A3B.
  • MiMo-V2.5-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $0.25 / $2 for Qwen3.5 35B-A3B.
  • MiMo-V2.5-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 262K.

Side by side

MiMo-V2.5-ProQwen3.5 35B-A3B
ProviderXiaomiAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index44.841.7
Released2026-04-222026-02-01
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window1.05M262K
Max output131K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.43$0.25
Output $ / M tokens$0.87$2
Results tracked2728

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), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 33.5 (#244)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena WebDev14771254
SciCode50.2%29.3%
LMArena Coding15021410
ALE-Bench899.8—

Reasoning MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 25.9 (#124), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 23.9 (#158)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen3.5 35B-A3B
CritPt4%0.6%
LMArena Hard Prompts14871400
DTBench84.5%80%
LMCA29.5%29.5%
NYT Connections (extended)34.4%—
Chess Puzzles—10%
Epoch Capabilities Index—142.52

Math Too close to call

MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 38.6 (#84), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 38.4 (#86)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Math14801404
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—56%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—70%
ProofBench22%—

Knowledge Qwen3.5 35B-A3B leads

MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 41.5 (#100), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 47.7 (#73)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Expert15011408
GPQA Diamond—83.5%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—10.5%

Multilingual MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 55.3 (#33), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 50.2 (#122)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Non-English14491379
LMArena Chinese15071458
LMArena French14891412
LMArena German14551367
LMArena Japanese14181326
LMArena Korean14361354
LMArena Russian14501377
LMArena Spanish14701390

Instruction Following MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 77.6 (#21), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 73.0 (#123)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Instruction Following14771379

Long Context MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 45.4 (#38), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 42.4 (#122)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Longer Query14821390

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads

MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 65.5 (#47), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 58.1 (#118)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5-ProQwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Text14651395
LMArena Creative Writing14401347
LMArena Multi-Turn14771391
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1493—
EQ-Bench 41208—

Frequently asked questions

Is MiMo-V2.5-Pro better than Qwen3.5 35B-A3B?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.8 to 41.7 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.5-Pro or Qwen3.5 35B-A3B?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.43 per million input tokens and $0.87 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 35B-A3B lists at $0.25 and $2.

Is MiMo-V2.5-Pro or Qwen3.5 35B-A3B better for coding?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.0 versus 33.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2.5-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.5-Pro and Qwen3.5 35B-A3B share?

22 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.5-Pro has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 35B-A3B has 28.

Related comparisons

Go deeper