Model comparison
MiMo-V2-Omni vs Qwen1.5-32B
MiMo-V2-Omni is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2-Omni scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-32B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2-Omni leads 61.6 to 34.4.
- Qwen1.5-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen1.5-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 42.9 | 30.0 |
| Released | 2026-03-18 | 2024-02-04 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 262K | — |
| Max output | 131K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.14 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.28 | — |
| Results tracked | 18 | 21 |
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), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.1 (#278)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1467 | 1155 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 32.3% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 42% |
Reasoning MiMo-V2-Omni leads
MiMo-V2-Omni: 28.6 (#86), Qwen1.5-32B: 20.9 (#210)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1445 | 1131 |
Math MiMo-V2-Omni leads
MiMo-V2-Omni: 36.4 (#112), Qwen1.5-32B: 30.5 (#207)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1432 | 1155 |
Knowledge MiMo-V2-Omni leads
MiMo-V2-Omni: 39.9 (#114), Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#291)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1449 | 1126 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 30.7% |
| MMLU | — | 74.4% |
Multimodal Not comparable
MiMo-V2-Omni: 37.9 (#62), Qwen1.5-32B: —
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1228 | — |
Multilingual MiMo-V2-Omni leads
MiMo-V2-Omni: 52.0 (#97), Qwen1.5-32B: 31.6 (#254)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1404 | 1106 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1469 | 1176 |
| LMArena French | 1448 | 1100 |
| LMArena German | 1398 | 1058 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1318 | 1027 |
| LMArena Korean | 1355 | 1007 |
| LMArena Russian | 1412 | 1073 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1432 | 1089 |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2-Omni leads
MiMo-V2-Omni: 75.4 (#62), Qwen1.5-32B: 58.0 (#260)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1428 | 1116 |
Long Context MiMo-V2-Omni leads
MiMo-V2-Omni: 44.1 (#72), Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#241)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1442 | 1146 |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2-Omni leads
MiMo-V2-Omni: 61.6 (#83), Qwen1.5-32B: 34.4 (#266)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1424 | 1137 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1393 | 1083 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1446 | 1140 |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2-Omni better than Qwen1.5-32B?
MiMo-V2-Omni is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.9 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.
Is MiMo-V2-Omni or Qwen1.5-32B better for coding?
MiMo-V2-Omni scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.7 versus 31.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Omni and Qwen1.5-32B share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Omni has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-32B has 21.