Model comparison

MiMo-V2-Omni vs Qwen Max

MiMo-V2-Omni is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 34.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

MiMo-V2-Omni Xiaomi

42.9

Rank #91 Confirmed

Qwen Max Alibaba (Qwen)

34.4

Rank #226 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2-Omni scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen Max in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where MiMo-V2-Omni leads 36.4 to 21.0.
  • MiMo-V2-Omni is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $1.60 / $6.40 for Qwen Max.
  • MiMo-V2-Omni accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 33K.

Side by side

MiMo-V2-Omni and Qwen Max specifications
MiMo-V2-OmniQwen Max
ProviderXiaomiAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index42.934.4
Released2026-03-182024-04-03
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window262K33K
Max output131K8K
Input $ / M tokens$0.14$1.60
Output $ / M tokens$0.28$6.40
Results tracked1823

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

Category by category

Coding MiMo-V2-Omni leads

MiMo-V2-Omni: 42.7 (#87), Qwen Max: 30.3 (#288)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen Max
LMArena Coding14671288
Aider Polyglot—21.8%

Reasoning MiMo-V2-Omni leads

MiMo-V2-Omni: 28.6 (#86), Qwen Max: 24.1 (#154)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen Max
LMArena Hard Prompts14451270

Math MiMo-V2-Omni leads

MiMo-V2-Omni: 36.4 (#112), Qwen Max: 21.0 (#272)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen Max
LMArena Math14321275
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—16.1%
MATH Level 5—67.2%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—1%

Knowledge MiMo-V2-Omni leads

MiMo-V2-Omni: 39.9 (#114), Qwen Max: 30.3 (#222)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen Max
LMArena Expert14491248
GPQA Diamond—56.1%

Multimodal Not comparable

MiMo-V2-Omni: 37.9 (#62), Qwen Max: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen Max
LMArena Vision1228—

Multilingual MiMo-V2-Omni leads

MiMo-V2-Omni: 52.0 (#97), Qwen Max: 42.0 (#197)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen Max
LMArena Non-English14041263
LMArena Chinese14691254
LMArena French14481329
LMArena German13981254
LMArena Japanese13181205
LMArena Korean13551141
LMArena Russian14121274
LMArena Spanish14321290

Instruction Following MiMo-V2-Omni leads

MiMo-V2-Omni: 75.4 (#62), Qwen Max: 66.7 (#203)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen Max
LMArena Instruction Following14281262

Long Context MiMo-V2-Omni leads

MiMo-V2-Omni: 44.1 (#72), Qwen Max: 39.4 (#175)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen Max
LMArena Longer Query14421289
Fiction.LiveBench—66.7%

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2-Omni leads

MiMo-V2-Omni: 61.6 (#83), Qwen Max: 48.0 (#200)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen Max
LMArena Text14241282
LMArena Creative Writing13931248
LMArena Multi-Turn14461277

Frequently asked questions

Is MiMo-V2-Omni better than Qwen Max?

MiMo-V2-Omni is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 34.4 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2-Omni or Qwen Max?

MiMo-V2-Omni is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; Qwen Max lists at $1.60 and $6.40.

Is MiMo-V2-Omni or Qwen Max better for coding?

MiMo-V2-Omni scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.7 versus 30.3 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2-Omni does, with 262K tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Omni and Qwen Max share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Omni has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Max has 23.

Related comparisons

Go deeper