Noometry

Model comparison

MiMo-V2-Flash vs Mistral Medium 3.5

MiMo-V2-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 40.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

MiMo-V2-Flash Xiaomi

41.3

Rank #138 Confirmed

Mistral Medium 3.5 Mistral AI

40.2

Rank #152 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2-Flash scores higher in 3 categories and Mistral Medium 3.5 in 5 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where MiMo-V2-Flash leads 24.9 to 17.3.
  • MiMo-V2-Flash is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $1.50 / $7.50 for Mistral Medium 3.5.

Side by side

MiMo-V2-FlashMistral Medium 3.5
ProviderXiaomiMistral AI
Noometry Index41.340.2
Released2025-12-16—
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window262K262K
Max output66K210K
Input $ / M tokens$0.14$1.50
Output $ / M tokens$0.28$7.50
Results tracked2122

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Too close to call

MiMo-V2-Flash: 36.1 (#211), Mistral Medium 3.5: 36.0 (#213)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-FlashMistral Medium 3.5
LMArena WebDev13301264
LMArena Coding14431461
SciCode25.9%—
ALE-Bench737.95—

Reasoning MiMo-V2-Flash leads

MiMo-V2-Flash: 24.9 (#157), Mistral Medium 3.5: 17.3 (#295)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-FlashMistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Hard Prompts14201436
Kagi LLM Benchmark—41.4%
NYT Connections (extended)—12.9%
CritPt0%—
Epoch Capabilities Index—141.35

Math Too close to call

MiMo-V2-Flash: 38.3 (#139), Mistral Medium 3.5: 39.1 (#113)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-FlashMistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Math13961431

Knowledge Too close to call

MiMo-V2-Flash: 39.7 (#131), Mistral Medium 3.5: 40.0 (#126)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-FlashMistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Expert14251432

Multimodal Not comparable

MiMo-V2-Flash: —, Mistral Medium 3.5: 38.3 (#65)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-FlashMistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Vision—1223

Multilingual Too close to call

MiMo-V2-Flash: 51.0 (#113), Mistral Medium 3.5: 51.9 (#100)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-FlashMistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Non-English13921404
LMArena Chinese14621442
LMArena French14291448
LMArena German13951451
LMArena Korean13581385
LMArena Russian13871395
LMArena Spanish14201409
LMArena Japanese1325—

Instruction Following Mistral Medium 3.5 leads

MiMo-V2-Flash: 73.5 (#120), Mistral Medium 3.5: 74.6 (#90)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-FlashMistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Instruction Following13921415

Long Context Too close to call

MiMo-V2-Flash: 43.0 (#110), Mistral Medium 3.5: 43.2 (#103)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-FlashMistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Longer Query14091415

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2-Flash leads

MiMo-V2-Flash: 59.7 (#106), Mistral Medium 3.5: 58.5 (#117)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-FlashMistral Medium 3.5
LMArena Text14111421
LMArena Creative Writing13751374
LMArena Multi-Turn14041423
EQ-Bench 4—993

Frequently asked questions

Is MiMo-V2-Flash better than Mistral Medium 3.5?

MiMo-V2-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 40.2 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2-Flash or Mistral Medium 3.5?

MiMo-V2-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; Mistral Medium 3.5 lists at $1.50 and $7.50.

Is MiMo-V2-Flash or Mistral Medium 3.5 better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (36.1 vs 36.0); test both on your own repository before choosing.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 262K tokens.

How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Flash and Mistral Medium 3.5 share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Flash has 21 scored results on Noometry and Mistral Medium 3.5 has 22.

Related comparisons

Go deeper