Model comparison
MiMo-V2-Pro vs Qwen1.5-110B
MiMo-V2-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.0 to 34.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2-Pro scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen1.5-110B in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2-Pro leads 62.8 to 38.0.
- Qwen1.5-110B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen1.5-110B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 43.0 | 34.2 |
| Released | 2026-03-18 | 2024-04-25 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | — |
| Max output | 131K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.43 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.87 | — |
| Results tracked | 23 | 20 |
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), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.0 (#264)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1476 | 1184 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1433 | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 35% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 44.4% |
| ALE-Bench | 785.17 | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
MiMo-V2-Pro: 22.1 (#206), Qwen1.5-110B: 22.7 (#189)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1457 | 1168 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 25.8% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 45.9% | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 57.7 |
Math MiMo-V2-Pro leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 39.5 (#102), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.7 (#201)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1447 | 1185 |
Knowledge MiMo-V2-Pro leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.4 (#111), Qwen1.5-110B: 31.2 (#219)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1478 | 1144 |
Multilingual MiMo-V2-Pro leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 52.7 (#81), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.6 (#250)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1416 | 1142 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1456 | 1206 |
| LMArena French | 1469 | 1151 |
| LMArena German | 1417 | 1123 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1366 | 1074 |
| LMArena Korean | 1400 | 1044 |
| LMArena Russian | 1427 | 1118 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1457 | 1142 |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2-Pro leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 76.0 (#49), Qwen1.5-110B: 60.3 (#252)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1445 | 1158 |
Long Context MiMo-V2-Pro leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.5 (#138), Qwen1.5-110B: 35.1 (#242)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1455 | 1157 |
| CL-bench | 15.7% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 6.9% | — |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2-Pro leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 62.8 (#70), Qwen1.5-110B: 38.0 (#255)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1436 | 1175 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1415 | 1148 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1456 | 1160 |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2-Pro better than Qwen1.5-110B?
MiMo-V2-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.0 to 34.2 on the Noometry Index.
Is MiMo-V2-Pro or Qwen1.5-110B better for coding?
MiMo-V2-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.8 versus 33.0 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Pro and Qwen1.5-110B share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Pro has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-110B has 20.