Model comparison
MiMo-V2.5 vs o1
MiMo-V2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.4 to 40.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.5 scores higher in 6 categories and o1 in 3 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where o1 leads 50.3 to 44.2.
- MiMo-V2.5 is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $60 for o1.
- MiMo-V2.5 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 200K.
- MiMo-V2.5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2.5 | o1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 43.4 | 40.9 |
| Released | 2026-04-22 | 2024-09-12 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 200K |
| Max output | 131K | 100K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.14 | $15 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.28 | $60 |
| Results tracked | 23 | 52 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding o1 leads
MiMo-V2.5: 43.9 (#81), o1: 46.1 (#70)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1469 | 1367 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 61.7% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1438 | — |
| SciCode | 43.1% | — |
| WeirdML | — | 47.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 69.7% |
| CadEval | — | 56% |
| ALE-Bench | 513.95 | — |
| HumanEval+ | — | 89% |
| MBPP+ | — | 80.2% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
MiMo-V2.5: —, o1: 24.6 (#117)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | — | 10% |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 51.1% |
Reasoning Too close to call
MiMo-V2.5: 28.6 (#101), o1: 27.9 (#111)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1450 | 1371 |
| SimpleBench | — | 41.7% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 30.7% |
| CritPt | 3.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 15% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 5.7% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 91.6% |
| DTBench | — | 74.7% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65.5% |
| LMCA | — | 22.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 141.91 |
| LiveBench | — | 75.7% |
Math Too close to call
MiMo-V2.5: 36.8 (#163), o1: 36.1 (#175)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1436 | 1388 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 14.7% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 73.3% |
| ProofBench | 16% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 80.3% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 94.7% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 9.3% |
Knowledge Too close to call
MiMo-V2.5: 40.8 (#115), o1: 41.5 (#110)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1460 | 1361 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 76.8% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 41.1% |
| Confabulations | — | 11.7% |
Multimodal MiMo-V2.5 leads
MiMo-V2.5: 39.8 (#54), o1: 34.2 (#93)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1247 | 1168 |
| GeoBench | — | 80% |
| VPCT | — | 37% |
| SpatialViz-Bench | — | 41.4% |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.5 leads
MiMo-V2.5: 51.9 (#99), o1: 48.6 (#142)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1404 | 1358 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1468 | 1394 |
| LMArena French | 1447 | 1344 |
| LMArena German | 1421 | 1337 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1306 | 1346 |
| LMArena Korean | 1363 | 1396 |
| LMArena Russian | 1395 | 1356 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1416 | 1345 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
MiMo-V2.5: 75.5 (#60), o1: 74.8 (#86)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1434 | 1367 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.5% |
Long Context o1 leads
MiMo-V2.5: 44.2 (#73), o1: 50.3 (#9)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1445 | 1378 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.5 leads
MiMo-V2.5: 61.6 (#86), o1: 55.6 (#144)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | o1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1428 | 1366 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1393 | 1348 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1445 | 1369 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 70.2% |
| LiveBench Language | — | 65.4% |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2.5 better than o1?
MiMo-V2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.4 to 40.9 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.5 or o1?
MiMo-V2.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; o1 lists at $15 and $60.
Is MiMo-V2.5 or o1 better for coding?
o1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.1 versus 43.9 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.5 does, with 1.05M tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.5 and o1 share?
18 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.5 has 23 scored results on Noometry and o1 has 52.