Noometry

Model comparison

MiMo-V2-Omni vs Qwen3-30B-A3B

MiMo-V2-Omni is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.6 to 38.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

MiMo-V2-Omni Xiaomi

43.6

Rank #88 Confirmed

Qwen3-30B-A3B Alibaba (Qwen)

38.9

Rank #179 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2-Omni scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen3-30B-A3B in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in long context, where MiMo-V2-Omni leads 44.1 to 31.0.
  • MiMo-V2-Omni is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $0.12 / $0.50 for Qwen3-30B-A3B.
  • MiMo-V2-Omni accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 41K.
  • Qwen3-30B-A3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

MiMo-V2-OmniQwen3-30B-A3B
ProviderXiaomiAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index43.638.9
Released2026-03-182025-04-28
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window262K41K
Max output131K16K
Input $ / M tokens$0.14$0.12
Output $ / M tokens$0.28$0.50
Results tracked1832

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

Category by category

Coding MiMo-V2-Omni leads

MiMo-V2-Omni: 43.3 (#89), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 37.5 (#194)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen3-30B-A3B
LMArena Coding14661416
SciCode—33.3%
WeirdML—29.8%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

MiMo-V2-Omni: —, Qwen3-30B-A3B: 29.8 (#82)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen3-30B-A3B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—41.4%

Reasoning MiMo-V2-Omni leads

MiMo-V2-Omni: 29.7 (#88), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 22.2 (#204)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen3-30B-A3B
LMArena Hard Prompts14451398
Kagi LLM Benchmark—54.9%
CritPt—0.3%
Chess Puzzles—8%
DTBench—69.3%
LMCA—22.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index—139.63

Math MiMo-V2-Omni leads

MiMo-V2-Omni: 39.1 (#115), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 37.4 (#157)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen3-30B-A3B
LMArena Math14301394
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—47.8%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—70.3%

Knowledge Qwen3-30B-A3B leads

MiMo-V2-Omni: 40.5 (#118), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 41.8 (#105)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen3-30B-A3B
LMArena Expert14491396
GPQA Diamond—70.1%
Confabulations—12.3%

Multimodal Not comparable

MiMo-V2-Omni: 38.6 (#63), Qwen3-30B-A3B: —

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen3-30B-A3B
LMArena Vision1228—

Multilingual MiMo-V2-Omni leads

MiMo-V2-Omni: 51.8 (#102), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 49.5 (#132)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen3-30B-A3B
LMArena Non-English14041372
LMArena Chinese14651433
LMArena French14471418
LMArena German13991380
LMArena Japanese13171337
LMArena Korean13551331
LMArena Russian14121370
LMArena Spanish14341404

Instruction Following MiMo-V2-Omni leads

MiMo-V2-Omni: 75.2 (#66), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 72.0 (#142)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen3-30B-A3B
LMArena Instruction Following14281363

Long Context MiMo-V2-Omni leads

MiMo-V2-Omni: 44.1 (#76), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 31.0 (#283)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen3-30B-A3B
LMArena Longer Query14421379
Fiction.LiveBench—40.6%

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2-Omni leads

MiMo-V2-Omni: 61.4 (#87), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 55.6 (#143)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen3-30B-A3B
LMArena Text14231384
LMArena Creative Writing13921317
LMArena Multi-Turn14451378
Short-Story Creative Writing—75.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is MiMo-V2-Omni better than Qwen3-30B-A3B?

MiMo-V2-Omni is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.6 to 38.9 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2-Omni or Qwen3-30B-A3B?

MiMo-V2-Omni is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; Qwen3-30B-A3B lists at $0.12 and $0.50.

Is MiMo-V2-Omni or Qwen3-30B-A3B better for coding?

MiMo-V2-Omni scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.3 versus 37.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2-Omni does, with 262K tokens against 41K.

How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Omni and Qwen3-30B-A3B share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Omni has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-30B-A3B has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper