Model comparison

MiMo-V2-Flash vs Qwen3.5 Plus

Qwen3.5 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 40.8 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2-Flash costs 5.1× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.5 Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 1 shared benchmarks.

MiMo-V2-Flash Xiaomi

40.8

Rank #137 Confirmed

Qwen3.5 Plus

Alibaba (Qwen)

42.3

Rank #103 Confirmed

Summary

They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. MiMo-V2-Flash scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.5 Plus in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.5 Plus leads 47.9 to 35.6.
MiMo-V2-Flash is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $2.40 for Qwen3.5 Plus.
Qwen3.5 Plus 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 and Qwen3.5 Plus specifications
	MiMo-V2-Flash	Qwen3.5 Plus
Provider	Xiaomi	Alibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index	40.8	42.3
Released	2025-12-16	2026-02-16
Weights	Open	Proprietary
Context window	262K	1M
Max output	66K	66K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.14	$0.40
Output $ / M tokens	$0.28	$2.40
Results tracked	21	15

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

MiMo-V2-Flash: 35.8 (#205), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	MiMo-V2-Flash	Qwen3.5 Plus
ALE-Bench	737.95	621.92
LMArena WebDev	1330	—
SciCode	25.9%	—
LMArena Coding	1443	—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

MiMo-V2-Flash: —, Qwen3.5 Plus: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	MiMo-V2-Flash	Qwen3.5 Plus
Vending-Bench 2	—	0.54

Reasoning Qwen3.5 Plus leads

MiMo-V2-Flash: 24.1 (#155), Qwen3.5 Plus: 32.0 (#67)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	MiMo-V2-Flash	Qwen3.5 Plus
CritPt	0%	—
Chess Puzzles	—	22%
LMArena Hard Prompts	1420	—
Mystery Game Puzzles	—	17%
DTBench	—	80.5%
LMCA	—	36.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index	—	146.79

Math Qwen3.5 Plus leads

MiMo-V2-Flash: 35.6 (#141), Qwen3.5 Plus: 47.9 (#55)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	MiMo-V2-Flash	Qwen3.5 Plus
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	—	86.7%
LMArena Math	1396	—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)	—	21%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)	—	2.1%

Knowledge Qwen3.5 Plus leads

MiMo-V2-Flash: 39.1 (#126), Qwen3.5 Plus: 46.0 (#78)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	MiMo-V2-Flash	Qwen3.5 Plus
GPQA Diamond	—	84.8%
SimpleQA Verified	—	25.4%
Vectara Hallucination Rate	—	10.7%
LMArena Expert	1425	—

Multilingual Not comparable

MiMo-V2-Flash: 51.1 (#109), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	MiMo-V2-Flash	Qwen3.5 Plus
LMArena Non-English	1391	—
LMArena Chinese	1463	—
LMArena French	1429	—
LMArena German	1395	—
LMArena Japanese	1324	—
LMArena Korean	1358	—
LMArena Russian	1387	—
LMArena Spanish	1420	—

Instruction Following Not comparable

MiMo-V2-Flash: 73.7 (#115), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	MiMo-V2-Flash	Qwen3.5 Plus
LMArena Instruction Following	1392	—

Long Context Too close to call

MiMo-V2-Flash: 43.0 (#106), Qwen3.5 Plus: 42.9 (#109)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	MiMo-V2-Flash	Qwen3.5 Plus
CL-bench	—	19.8%
CL-bench Life	—	12.4%
LMArena Longer Query	1409	—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

MiMo-V2-Flash: 59.9 (#101), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	MiMo-V2-Flash	Qwen3.5 Plus
LMArena Text	1411	—
LMArena Creative Writing	1375	—
LMArena Multi-Turn	1404	—

Frequently asked questions

Is MiMo-V2-Flash better than Qwen3.5 Plus?

Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2-Flash or Qwen3.5 Plus?

MiMo-V2-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 Plus lists at $0.40 and $2.40.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5 Plus does, with 1M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Flash and Qwen3.5 Plus share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Flash has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 Plus has 15.