Noometry

Model comparison

MiMo-V2-Omni vs Qwen3.5 35B-A3B

MiMo-V2-Omni is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.6 to 42.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

MiMo-V2-Omni Xiaomi

43.6

Rank #88 Confirmed

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Alibaba (Qwen)

42.0

Rank #123 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2-Omni scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen3.5 35B-A3B in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where MiMo-V2-Omni leads 43.3 to 33.8.
  • MiMo-V2-Omni is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $0.25 / $2 for Qwen3.5 35B-A3B.
  • Qwen3.5 35B-A3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

MiMo-V2-OmniQwen3.5 35B-A3B
ProviderXiaomiAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index43.642.0
Released2026-03-182026-02-01
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window262K262K
Max output131K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.14$0.25
Output $ / M tokens$0.28$2
Results tracked1828

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), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 33.8 (#251)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Coding14661410
LMArena WebDev—1254
SciCode—29.3%

Reasoning MiMo-V2-Omni leads

MiMo-V2-Omni: 29.7 (#88), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 24.6 (#161)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Hard Prompts14451400
CritPt—0.6%
Chess Puzzles—10%
DTBench—80%
LMCA—29.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index—142.52

Math Too close to call

MiMo-V2-Omni: 39.1 (#115), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 39.9 (#97)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Math14301404
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—56%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—70%

Knowledge Qwen3.5 35B-A3B leads

MiMo-V2-Omni: 40.5 (#118), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 47.8 (#79)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Expert14491408
GPQA Diamond—83.5%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—10.5%

Multimodal Not comparable

MiMo-V2-Omni: 38.6 (#63), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: —

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Vision1228—

Multilingual MiMo-V2-Omni leads

MiMo-V2-Omni: 51.8 (#102), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 50.0 (#127)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Non-English14041378
LMArena Chinese14651457
LMArena French14471412
LMArena German13991367
LMArena Japanese13171325
LMArena Korean13551356
LMArena Russian14121376
LMArena Spanish14341392

Instruction Following MiMo-V2-Omni leads

MiMo-V2-Omni: 75.2 (#66), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 72.8 (#128)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Instruction Following14281379

Long Context MiMo-V2-Omni leads

MiMo-V2-Omni: 44.1 (#76), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 42.4 (#127)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Longer Query14421389

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2-Omni leads

MiMo-V2-Omni: 61.4 (#87), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 57.9 (#124)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-OmniQwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Text14231395
LMArena Creative Writing13921346
LMArena Multi-Turn14451390

Frequently asked questions

Is MiMo-V2-Omni better than Qwen3.5 35B-A3B?

MiMo-V2-Omni is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.6 to 42.0 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2-Omni or Qwen3.5 35B-A3B?

MiMo-V2-Omni is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 35B-A3B lists at $0.25 and $2.

Is MiMo-V2-Omni or Qwen3.5 35B-A3B better for coding?

MiMo-V2-Omni scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.3 versus 33.8 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 262K tokens.

How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Omni and Qwen3.5 35B-A3B share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Omni has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 35B-A3B has 28.

Related comparisons

Go deeper