Model comparison
MiMo-V2-Pro vs Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
MiMo-V2-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.0 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2-Pro scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2-Pro leads 62.8 to 49.4.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 43.0 | 38.8 |
| Released | 2026-03-18 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | — |
| Max output | 131K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.43 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.87 | — |
| Results tracked | 23 | 14 |
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), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 38.5 (#175)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1476 | 1314 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1433 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 785.17 | — |
Reasoning Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 22.1 (#206), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 25.9 (#141)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1457 | 1299 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 25.8% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 45.9% | — |
Math MiMo-V2-Pro leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 39.5 (#102), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 36.1 (#174)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1447 | 1298 |
Knowledge MiMo-V2-Pro leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.4 (#111), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 35.5 (#183)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1478 | 1289 |
Multilingual MiMo-V2-Pro leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 52.7 (#81), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 41.9 (#201)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1416 | 1265 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1456 | 1314 |
| LMArena German | 1417 | 1231 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1366 | 1207 |
| LMArena Russian | 1427 | 1271 |
| LMArena French | 1469 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1400 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1457 | — |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2-Pro leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 76.0 (#49), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.2 (#199)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1445 | 1275 |
Long Context MiMo-V2-Pro leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.5 (#138), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#184)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1455 | 1292 |
| CL-bench | 15.7% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 6.9% | — |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2-Pro leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 62.8 (#70), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.4 (#192)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1436 | 1299 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1415 | 1262 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1456 | 1299 |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2-Pro better than Qwen2.5 Plus 1127?
MiMo-V2-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.0 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is MiMo-V2-Pro or Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better for coding?
MiMo-V2-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.8 versus 38.5 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Pro and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 share?
14 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Pro has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14.