Model comparison
MiMo-V2.5 vs Qwen2.5 72B Instruct
MiMo-V2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.4 to 31.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where MiMo-V2.5 leads 36.8 to 19.3.
- MiMo-V2.5 is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $1.40 / $5.60 for Qwen2.5 72B Instruct.
- MiMo-V2.5 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 43.4 | 31.9 |
| Released | 2026-04-22 | 2024-09 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 131K |
| Max output | 131K | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.14 | $1.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.28 | $5.60 |
| Results tracked | 23 | 43 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2.5 leads
MiMo-V2.5: 43.9 (#81), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 33.2 (#260)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1469 | 1292 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1438 | — |
| SciCode | 43.1% | — |
| WeirdML | — | 16% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 45.8% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 55.9% |
| ALE-Bench | 513.95 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
MiMo-V2.5: —, Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 22.1 (#133)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | — | 5.7% |
| BALROG | — | 16.2% |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 35.8% |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.5 leads
MiMo-V2.5: 28.6 (#101), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 22.3 (#199)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1450 | 1271 |
| CritPt | 3.7% | — |
| DTBench | — | 62.9% |
| LMCA | — | 13.4% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 79.8% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 129 |
| ForecastBench | — | 57.5 |
| HellaSwag | — | 84.8% |
| PIQA | — | 82.6% |
| WinoGrande | — | 82.3% |
Math MiMo-V2.5 leads
MiMo-V2.5: 36.8 (#163), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 19.3 (#287)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1436 | 1283 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 8.1% |
| ProofBench | 16% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 33% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 63.2% |
Knowledge MiMo-V2.5 leads
MiMo-V2.5: 40.8 (#115), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 27.0 (#253)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1460 | 1245 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 49.1% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 63.1% |
| Confabulations | — | 19.1% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 42.6% |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 94.5% |
| MMLU | — | 85.3% |
| TriviaQA | — | 71.9% |
Multimodal Not comparable
MiMo-V2.5: 39.8 (#54), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1247 | — |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.5 leads
MiMo-V2.5: 51.9 (#99), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 41.0 (#213)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1404 | 1252 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1468 | 1272 |
| LMArena French | 1447 | 1280 |
| LMArena German | 1421 | 1234 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1306 | 1180 |
| LMArena Korean | 1363 | 1188 |
| LMArena Russian | 1395 | 1264 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1416 | 1256 |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.5 leads
MiMo-V2.5: 75.5 (#60), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 65.5 (#221)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1434 | 1254 |
| IFEval | — | 80.6% |
Long Context MiMo-V2.5 leads
MiMo-V2.5: 44.2 (#73), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 38.9 (#188)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1445 | 1282 |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.5 leads
MiMo-V2.5: 61.6 (#86), Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 46.7 (#215)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1428 | 1269 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1393 | 1221 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1445 | 1272 |
| WildBench | — | 80.2% |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2.5 better than Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?
MiMo-V2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.4 to 31.9 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.5 or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?
MiMo-V2.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 72B Instruct lists at $1.40 and $5.60.
Is MiMo-V2.5 or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct better for coding?
MiMo-V2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.9 versus 33.2 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.5 does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.5 and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.5 has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct has 43.