Model comparison
MiMo-V2.5 vs Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
MiMo-V2.5 and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct score almost the same on the Noometry Index (43.0 vs 42.5), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.5 scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct in 4 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where MiMo-V2.5 leads 44.1 to 37.0.
- MiMo-V2.5 is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $0.50 / $2 for Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct.
- MiMo-V2.5 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 43.0 | 42.5 |
| Released | 2026-04-22 | 2025-09 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 131K |
| Max output | 131K | 33K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.14 | $0.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.28 | $2 |
| Results tracked | 23 | 25 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2.5 leads
MiMo-V2.5: 43.6 (#75), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 41.9 (#101)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1469 | 1441 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1438 | — |
| SciCode | 43.1% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 513.95 | — |
Reasoning Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct leads
MiMo-V2.5: 27.8 (#98), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 30.1 (#79)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1450 | 1428 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 66.7% |
| CritPt | 3.7% | — |
Math Too close to call
MiMo-V2.5: 35.4 (#145), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 36.3 (#118)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1436 | 1440 |
| ProofBench | 16% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 46.7% |
Knowledge Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct leads
MiMo-V2.5: 40.2 (#109), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 41.3 (#102)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1459 | 1416 |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 78.6% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 9.3% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 63% |
Multimodal Not comparable
MiMo-V2.5: 39.0 (#53), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1245 | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
MiMo-V2.5: 52.0 (#96), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 52.3 (#88)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1404 | 1407 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1467 | 1461 |
| LMArena French | 1447 | 1415 |
| LMArena German | 1421 | 1416 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1304 | 1398 |
| LMArena Korean | 1363 | 1366 |
| LMArena Russian | 1395 | 1403 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1412 | 1436 |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.5 leads
MiMo-V2.5: 75.7 (#55), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 71.0 (#154)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1433 | 1388 |
| IFEval | — | 81% |
Long Context MiMo-V2.5 leads
MiMo-V2.5: 44.1 (#69), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 37.0 (#218)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1444 | 1403 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 55.6% |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.5 leads
MiMo-V2.5: 61.8 (#82), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 58.2 (#116)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1427 | 1417 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1392 | 1333 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1445 | 1415 |
| WildBench | — | 80.7% |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2.5 better than Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct?
MiMo-V2.5 and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct score almost the same on the Noometry Index (43.0 vs 42.5), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.5 or Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct?
MiMo-V2.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct lists at $0.50 and $2.
Is MiMo-V2.5 or Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct better for coding?
MiMo-V2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.6 versus 41.9 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 Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.5 has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct has 25.