Model comparison

MiMo-V2.5 vs Qwen2.5-Max

MiMo-V2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.4 to 40.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

MiMo-V2.5 Xiaomi

43.4

Rank #93 Confirmed

Qwen2.5-Max Alibaba (Qwen)

40.7

Rank #146 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.5 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2.5 leads 61.6 to 55.4.
  • MiMo-V2.5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

MiMo-V2.5 and Qwen2.5-Max specifications
MiMo-V2.5Qwen2.5-Max
ProviderXiaomiAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index43.440.7
Released2026-04-222025-01-25
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window1.05M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.14—
Output $ / M tokens$0.28—
Results tracked2327

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-Max: 41.8 (#117)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Coding14691359
LMArena WebDev1438—
SciCode43.1%—
LiveBench Coding—64.4%
ALE-Bench513.95—

Reasoning MiMo-V2.5 leads

MiMo-V2.5: 28.6 (#101), Qwen2.5-Max: 25.6 (#147)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Hard Prompts14501360
CritPt3.7%—
LiveBench Reasoning—51.4%
LiveBench Data Analysis—67.9%
Epoch Capabilities Index—132.53
LiveBench—62.3%

Math Too close to call

MiMo-V2.5: 36.8 (#163), Qwen2.5-Max: 36.9 (#162)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Math14361369
ProofBench16%—
LiveBench Math—58.4%

Knowledge MiMo-V2.5 leads

MiMo-V2.5: 40.8 (#115), Qwen2.5-Max: 35.3 (#186)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Expert14601337
Confabulations—21.8%

Multimodal Not comparable

MiMo-V2.5: 39.8 (#54), Qwen2.5-Max: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Vision1247—

Multilingual MiMo-V2.5 leads

MiMo-V2.5: 51.9 (#99), Qwen2.5-Max: 48.1 (#146)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Non-English14041352
LMArena Chinese14681382
LMArena French14471396
LMArena German14211350
LMArena Japanese13061300
LMArena Korean13631304
LMArena Russian13951353
LMArena Spanish14161377

Instruction Following MiMo-V2.5 leads

MiMo-V2.5: 75.5 (#60), Qwen2.5-Max: 71.3 (#152)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Instruction Following14341335
LiveBench Instruction Following—75.3%

Long Context MiMo-V2.5 leads

MiMo-V2.5: 44.2 (#73), Qwen2.5-Max: 41.4 (#142)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Longer Query14451358

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.5 leads

MiMo-V2.5: 61.6 (#86), Qwen2.5-Max: 55.4 (#146)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2.5Qwen2.5-Max
LMArena Text14281367
LMArena Creative Writing13931339
LMArena Multi-Turn14451364
Short-Story Creative Writing—72.9%
LiveBench Language—56.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is MiMo-V2.5 better than Qwen2.5-Max?

MiMo-V2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.4 to 40.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is MiMo-V2.5 or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?

MiMo-V2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.9 versus 41.8 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.5 and Qwen2.5-Max share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.5 has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.

Related comparisons

Go deeper