# MiMo-V2.5 vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think

> MiMo-V2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.4 to 37.9 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mimo-v2-5-vs-olmo-3-1-32b-think
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 15

## Summary

- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Think in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2.5 leads 61.6 to 46.2.

## Snapshot

| | MiMo-V2.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 43.4 | 37.9 |
| Rank | 93 | 191 |
| Context | 1.05M | — |
| Input $/M | $0.14 | — |
| Output $/M | $0.28 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- MiMo-V2.5: 43.9 (#81)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 37.7 (#189)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1469 | 1291 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1438 | — |
| SciCode | 43.1% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 513.95 | — |

## Reasoning

- MiMo-V2.5: 28.6 (#101)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 25.2 (#150)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1450 | 1272 |
| CritPt | 3.7% | — |

## Math

- MiMo-V2.5: 36.8 (#163)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 36.3 (#168)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1436 | 1305 |
| ProofBench | 16% | — |

## Knowledge

- MiMo-V2.5: 40.8 (#115)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.7 (#181)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1460 | 1295 |

## Multimodal

- MiMo-V2.5: 39.8 (#54)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1247 | — |

## Multilingual

- MiMo-V2.5: 51.9 (#99)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.1 (#231)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1404 | 1209 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1468 | 1242 |
| LMArena French | 1447 | 1260 |
| LMArena German | 1421 | 1262 |
| LMArena Russian | 1395 | 1193 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1416 | 1289 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1306 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1363 | — |

## Instruction Following

- MiMo-V2.5: 75.5 (#60)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.6 (#218)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1434 | 1247 |

## Long Context

- MiMo-V2.5: 44.2 (#73)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#195)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1445 | 1272 |

## Writing & Preference

- MiMo-V2.5: 61.6 (#86)
- Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.2 (#220)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Olmo 3.1 32b Think |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1428 | 1272 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1393 | 1226 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1445 | 1252 |

## FAQ

### Is MiMo-V2.5 better than Olmo 3.1 32b Think?

MiMo-V2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.4 to 37.9 on the Noometry Index.

### Is MiMo-V2.5 or Olmo 3.1 32b Think better for coding?

MiMo-V2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.9 versus 37.7 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.5 and Olmo 3.1 32b Think share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.5 has 23 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.