Model comparison
MiMo-V2-Flash vs Qwen Turbo
MiMo-V2-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 2.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2-Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where MiMo-V2-Flash leads 38.3 to 15.3.
- Qwen Turbo is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.14 / $0.28 for MiMo-V2-Flash.
- Qwen Turbo accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.
- MiMo-V2-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen Turbo | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.3 | 27.1 |
| Released | 2025-12-16 | 2024-11-01 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 262K | 1M |
| Max output | 66K | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.14 | $0.05 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.28 | $0.20 |
| Results tracked | 21 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
MiMo-V2-Flash: 36.1 (#211), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1330 | — |
| SciCode | 25.9% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1443 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 737.95 | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
MiMo-V2-Flash: 24.9 (#157), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1420 | — |
Math MiMo-V2-Flash leads
MiMo-V2-Flash: 38.3 (#139), Qwen Turbo: 15.3 (#297)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 6.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1396 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 56.2% |
Knowledge MiMo-V2-Flash leads
MiMo-V2-Flash: 39.7 (#131), Qwen Turbo: 22.2 (#272)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 41.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1425 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
MiMo-V2-Flash: 51.0 (#113), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1392 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1462 | — |
| LMArena French | 1429 | — |
| LMArena German | 1395 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1325 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1358 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1387 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1420 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
MiMo-V2-Flash: 73.5 (#120), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1392 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
MiMo-V2-Flash: 43.0 (#110), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1409 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
MiMo-V2-Flash: 59.7 (#106), Qwen Turbo: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1411 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1375 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1404 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2-Flash better than Qwen Turbo?
MiMo-V2-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 2.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2-Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2-Flash or Qwen Turbo?
Qwen Turbo is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2-Flash lists at $0.14 and $0.28.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen Turbo does, with 1M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Flash and Qwen Turbo share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Flash has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Turbo has 3.