Model comparison

MiMo-V2-Pro vs Qwen Plus

MiMo-V2-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.0 to 37.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

MiMo-V2-Pro Xiaomi

43.0

Rank #103 Confirmed

Qwen Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

37.1

Rank #210 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2-Pro scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen Plus in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where MiMo-V2-Pro leads 39.5 to 23.3.
  • MiMo-V2-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $1.20 for Qwen Plus.
  • MiMo-V2-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

Side by side

MiMo-V2-Pro and Qwen Plus specifications
MiMo-V2-ProQwen Plus
ProviderXiaomiAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index43.037.1
Released2026-03-182024-01-25
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1.05M1M
Max output131K33K
Input $ / M tokens$0.43$0.40
Output $ / M tokens$0.87$1.20
Results tracked2320

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

Category by category

Coding MiMo-V2-Pro leads

MiMo-V2-Pro: 43.8 (#83), Qwen Plus: 38.9 (#167)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-ProQwen Plus
LMArena Coding14761328
LMArena WebDev1433—
ALE-Bench785.17—

Reasoning Qwen Plus leads

MiMo-V2-Pro: 22.1 (#206), Qwen Plus: 28.4 (#107)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-ProQwen Plus
LMArena Hard Prompts14571317
Kagi LLM Benchmark—63.3%
NYT Connections (extended)25.8%—
Thematic Generalization45.9%—
DTBench—81.1%
LMCA—24%

Math MiMo-V2-Pro leads

MiMo-V2-Pro: 39.5 (#102), Qwen Plus: 23.3 (#271)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-ProQwen Plus
LMArena Math14471326
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—17.8%
MATH Level 5—65.3%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—1.7%

Knowledge MiMo-V2-Pro leads

MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.4 (#111), Qwen Plus: 27.4 (#251)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-ProQwen Plus
LMArena Expert14781328
GPQA Diamond—48.1%

Multilingual MiMo-V2-Pro leads

MiMo-V2-Pro: 52.7 (#81), Qwen Plus: 45.1 (#175)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-ProQwen Plus
LMArena Non-English14161310
LMArena Chinese14561347
LMArena Japanese13661251
LMArena Russian14271323
LMArena French1469—
LMArena German1417—
LMArena Korean1400—
LMArena Spanish1457—

Instruction Following MiMo-V2-Pro leads

MiMo-V2-Pro: 76.0 (#49), Qwen Plus: 68.8 (#181)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-ProQwen Plus
LMArena Instruction Following14451303

Long Context MiMo-V2-Pro leads

MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.5 (#138), Qwen Plus: 40.3 (#158)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-ProQwen Plus
LMArena Longer Query14551324
CL-bench15.7%—
CL-bench Life6.9%—

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2-Pro leads

MiMo-V2-Pro: 62.8 (#70), Qwen Plus: 52.2 (#176)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-ProQwen Plus
LMArena Text14361326
LMArena Creative Writing14151293
LMArena Multi-Turn14561336

Frequently asked questions

Is MiMo-V2-Pro better than Qwen Plus?

MiMo-V2-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.0 to 37.1 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2-Pro or Qwen Plus?

MiMo-V2-Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.43 per million input tokens and $0.87 per million output tokens; Qwen Plus lists at $0.40 and $1.20.

Is MiMo-V2-Pro or Qwen Plus better for coding?

MiMo-V2-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.8 versus 38.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Pro and Qwen Plus share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Pro has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Plus has 20.

Related comparisons

Go deeper