# MiMo-V2.5 vs Qwen3-1.7B

> MiMo-V2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.0 to 26.2 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mimo-v2-5-vs-qwen3-1-7b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in knowledge, where MiMo-V2.5 leads 40.2 to 19.6.

## Snapshot

| | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 43.0 | 26.2 |
| Rank | 89 | 331 |
| Context | 1.05M | — |
| Input $/M | $0.14 | — |
| Output $/M | $0.28 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- MiMo-V2.5: 43.6 (#75)
- Qwen3-1.7B: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1438 | — |
| SciCode | 43.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1469 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 513.95 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- MiMo-V2.5: —
- Qwen3-1.7B: 24.5 (#108)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 28.4% |

## Reasoning

- MiMo-V2.5: 27.8 (#98)
- Qwen3-1.7B: 18.5 (#263)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 3.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1450 | — |

## Math

- MiMo-V2.5: 35.4 (#145)
- Qwen3-1.7B: 15.4 (#288)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 8.1% |
| ProofBench | 16% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1436 | — |

## Knowledge

- MiMo-V2.5: 40.2 (#109)
- Qwen3-1.7B: 19.6 (#273)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 38% |
| LMArena Expert | 1459 | — |

## Multimodal

- MiMo-V2.5: 39.0 (#53)
- Qwen3-1.7B: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1245 | — |

## Multilingual

- MiMo-V2.5: 52.0 (#96)
- Qwen3-1.7B: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1404 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1467 | — |
| LMArena French | 1447 | — |
| LMArena German | 1421 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1304 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1363 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1395 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1412 | — |

## Instruction Following

- MiMo-V2.5: 75.7 (#55)
- Qwen3-1.7B: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1433 | — |

## Long Context

- MiMo-V2.5: 44.1 (#69)
- Qwen3-1.7B: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1444 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- MiMo-V2.5: 61.8 (#82)
- Qwen3-1.7B: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3-1.7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1427 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1392 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1445 | — |

## FAQ

### Is MiMo-V2.5 better than Qwen3-1.7B?

MiMo-V2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.0 to 26.2 on the Noometry Index.

### How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.5 and Qwen3-1.7B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.5 has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-1.7B has 4.