# MiMo-V2.5 vs Qwen3.7 Flash

> MiMo-V2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.0 to 39.5 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.7 Flash costs 3.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

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

## Summary

- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.7 Flash leads 48.9 to 40.2.
- Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper at $0.03 / $0.13 per million input/output tokens, against $0.14 / $0.28 for MiMo-V2.5.
- MiMo-V2.5 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
- MiMo-V2.5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 43.0 | 39.5 |
| Rank | 89 | 152 |
| Context | 1.05M | 1M |
| Input $/M | $0.14 | $0.03 |
| Output $/M | $0.28 | $0.13 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- MiMo-V2.5: 43.6 (#75)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1438 | — |
| SciCode | 43.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1469 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 513.95 | — |

## Reasoning

- MiMo-V2.5: 27.8 (#98)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: 27.3 (#108)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 43.8% |
| CritPt | 3.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 23% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1450 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 15% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 144.62 |

## Math

- MiMo-V2.5: 35.4 (#145)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: 37.3 (#100)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 19.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 86.7% |
| ProofBench | 16% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1436 | — |

## Knowledge

- MiMo-V2.5: 40.2 (#109)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: 48.9 (#69)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 82.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1459 | — |

## Multimodal

- MiMo-V2.5: 39.0 (#53)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1245 | — |

## Multilingual

- MiMo-V2.5: 52.0 (#96)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1433 | — |

## Long Context

- MiMo-V2.5: 44.1 (#69)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1444 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- MiMo-V2.5: 61.8 (#82)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1427 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1392 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1445 | — |

## FAQ

### Is MiMo-V2.5 better than Qwen3.7 Flash?

MiMo-V2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.0 to 39.5 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.7 Flash costs 3.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.5 or Qwen3.7 Flash?

Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.03 per million input tokens and $0.13 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2.5 lists at $0.14 and $0.28.

### Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2.5 does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

### How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.5 and Qwen3.7 Flash share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.5 has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Flash has 7.