Model comparison
MiMo-V2-Pro vs Qwen3.7 Max
Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 43.0 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2-Pro costs 6.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2-Pro scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.7 Max in 8 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.7 Max leads 49.2 to 22.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 25.8% for MiMo-V2-Pro and 85.1% for Qwen3.7 Max.
- MiMo-V2-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $7.50 for Qwen3.7 Max.
- MiMo-V2-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.7 Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 43.0 | 51.5 |
| Released | 2026-03-18 | 2026-05-19 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Max output | 131K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.43 | $2.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.87 | $7.50 |
| Results tracked | 23 | 33 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.7 Max leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 43.8 (#83), Qwen3.7 Max: 50.4 (#45)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1433 | 1515 |
| LMArena Coding | 1476 | 1498 |
| ALE-Bench | 785.17 | 1,189 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 77.3% |
| SciCode | — | 48.8% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
MiMo-V2-Pro: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 22.1 (#135)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| GBAEval | — | 0.4% |
Reasoning Qwen3.7 Max leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 22.1 (#206), Qwen3.7 Max: 49.2 (#38)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 25.8% | 85.1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1457 | 1483 |
| SimpleBench | — | 70.4% |
| CritPt | — | 13.4% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 19% |
| Thematic Generalization | 45.9% | — |
| EBR-Bench | — | 9.5% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 32% |
| DTBench | — | 92.3% |
| LMCA | — | 44% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 153.68 |
Math Qwen3.7 Max leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 39.5 (#102), Qwen3.7 Max: 62.4 (#32)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1447 | 1490 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 64.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 34.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 95.6% |
| ProofBench | — | 26% |
Knowledge Qwen3.7 Max leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.4 (#111), Qwen3.7 Max: 61.6 (#28)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1478 | 1488 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 90.9% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 55.8% |
Multilingual Qwen3.7 Max leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 52.7 (#81), Qwen3.7 Max: 56.9 (#15)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1416 | 1474 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1456 | 1530 |
| LMArena Russian | 1427 | 1484 |
| LMArena French | 1469 | — |
| LMArena German | 1417 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1366 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1400 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1457 | — |
Instruction Following Too close to call
MiMo-V2-Pro: 76.0 (#49), Qwen3.7 Max: 76.7 (#38)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1445 | 1460 |
Long Context Qwen3.7 Max leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.5 (#138), Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#40)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1455 | 1482 |
| CL-bench | 15.7% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 6.9% | — |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Max leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 62.8 (#70), Qwen3.7 Max: 65.0 (#54)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1436 | 1476 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1415 | 1449 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1456 | 1481 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1110 |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2-Pro better than Qwen3.7 Max?
Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 43.0 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2-Pro costs 6.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2-Pro or Qwen3.7 Max?
MiMo-V2-Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.43 per million input tokens and $0.87 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Max lists at $2.50 and $7.50.
Is MiMo-V2-Pro or Qwen3.7 Max better for coding?
Qwen3.7 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.4 versus 43.8 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 Qwen3.7 Max share?
15 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Pro has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Max has 33.