Model comparison
MiMo-V2-Pro vs Qwen3.5 122B-A10B
MiMo-V2-Pro and Qwen3.5 122B-A10B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (43.0 vs 42.1), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 20 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2-Pro scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen3.5 122B-A10B in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads 27.2 to 22.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 25.8% for MiMo-V2-Pro and 51.7% for Qwen3.5 122B-A10B.
- MiMo-V2-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $3.20 for Qwen3.5 122B-A10B.
- MiMo-V2-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 262K.
- Qwen3.5 122B-A10B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 43.0 | 42.1 |
| Released | 2026-03-18 | 2026-02-23 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 262K |
| Max output | 131K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.43 | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.87 | $3.20 |
| Results tracked | 23 | 27 |
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), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 39.1 (#162)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1433 | 1360 |
| LMArena Coding | 1476 | 1436 |
| SciCode | — | 35.6% |
| ALE-Bench | 785.17 | — |
Reasoning Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 22.1 (#206), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 27.2 (#123)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 25.8% | 51.7% |
| Thematic Generalization | 45.9% | 51.2% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1457 | 1421 |
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 17% |
| DTBench | — | 84.3% |
| LMCA | — | 32.2% |
Math Too close to call
MiMo-V2-Pro: 39.5 (#102), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 39.1 (#112)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1447 | 1432 |
Knowledge MiMo-V2-Pro leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.4 (#111), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 38.8 (#142)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1478 | 1432 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 11.2% |
Multimodal Not comparable
MiMo-V2-Pro: —, Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 39.6 (#57)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1245 |
Multilingual MiMo-V2-Pro leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 52.7 (#81), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 51.6 (#107)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1416 | 1400 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1456 | 1462 |
| LMArena French | 1469 | 1442 |
| LMArena German | 1417 | 1426 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1366 | 1367 |
| LMArena Korean | 1400 | 1352 |
| LMArena Russian | 1427 | 1400 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1457 | 1424 |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2-Pro leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 76.0 (#49), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 73.8 (#115)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1445 | 1399 |
Long Context Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.5 (#138), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 43.0 (#109)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1455 | 1410 |
| CL-bench | 15.7% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 6.9% | — |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2-Pro leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 62.8 (#70), Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 60.0 (#105)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1436 | 1417 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1415 | 1368 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1456 | 1416 |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2-Pro better than Qwen3.5 122B-A10B?
MiMo-V2-Pro and Qwen3.5 122B-A10B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (43.0 vs 42.1), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2-Pro or Qwen3.5 122B-A10B?
MiMo-V2-Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.43 per million input tokens and $0.87 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 122B-A10B lists at $0.40 and $3.20.
Is MiMo-V2-Pro or Qwen3.5 122B-A10B better for coding?
MiMo-V2-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.8 versus 39.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Pro and Qwen3.5 122B-A10B share?
20 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Pro has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 122B-A10B has 27.