Model comparison
MiMo-V2-Flash vs QwQ-32B
MiMo-V2-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2-Flash scores higher in 7 categories and QwQ-32B in 1 category; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2-Flash leads 59.7 to 50.6.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2-Flash | QwQ-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.3 | 39.8 |
| Released | 2025-12-16 | 2024-11-28 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 262K | — |
| Max output | 66K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.14 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.28 | — |
| Results tracked | 21 | 36 |
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), QwQ-32B: 35.4 (#226)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1443 | 1333 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 20.9% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1330 | — |
| SciCode | 25.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 44.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 72.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54.4% |
| ALE-Bench | 737.95 | — |
Reasoning MiMo-V2-Flash leads
MiMo-V2-Flash: 24.9 (#157), QwQ-32B: 23.7 (#174)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1420 | 1325 |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 83.5% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 137.6 |
| ForecastBench | — | 58.3 |
| LiveBench | — | 72% |
Math Too close to call
MiMo-V2-Flash: 38.3 (#139), QwQ-32B: 38.0 (#143)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1396 | 1359 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 59.2% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 77.8% |
Knowledge MiMo-V2-Flash leads
MiMo-V2-Flash: 39.7 (#131), QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#158)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1425 | 1324 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.3% |
| Confabulations | — | 15.6% |
Multilingual MiMo-V2-Flash leads
MiMo-V2-Flash: 51.0 (#113), QwQ-32B: 44.8 (#176)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1392 | 1305 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1462 | 1378 |
| LMArena French | 1429 | 1336 |
| LMArena German | 1395 | 1313 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1325 | 1262 |
| LMArena Korean | 1358 | 1279 |
| LMArena Russian | 1387 | 1297 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1420 | 1354 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
MiMo-V2-Flash: 73.5 (#120), QwQ-32B: 72.6 (#137)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1392 | 1297 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.8% |
Long Context QwQ-32B leads
MiMo-V2-Flash: 43.0 (#110), QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1409 | 1308 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2-Flash leads
MiMo-V2-Flash: 59.7 (#106), QwQ-32B: 50.6 (#180)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1411 | 1329 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1375 | 1288 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1404 | 1314 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 80.2% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1257 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 51.4% |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2-Flash better than QwQ-32B?
MiMo-V2-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 39.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is MiMo-V2-Flash or QwQ-32B better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (36.1 vs 35.4); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Flash and QwQ-32B share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Flash has 21 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.