# MiMo-V2.5 vs Qwen3.7 Plus

> Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 43.4 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2.5 costs 4.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mimo-v2-5-vs-qwen3-7-plus
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 20

## Summary

- They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.5 scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.7 Plus in 8 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.7 Plus leads 54.9 to 40.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is CritPt: 3.7% for MiMo-V2.5 and 9.1% for Qwen3.7 Plus.
- MiMo-V2.5 is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $1.60 for Qwen3.7 Plus.
- 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 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 43.4 | 45.3 |
| Rank | 93 | 72 |
| Context | 1.05M | 1M |
| Input $/M | $0.14 | $0.40 |
| Output $/M | $0.28 | $1.60 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- MiMo-V2.5: 43.9 (#81)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 36.6 (#206)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 43.1% | 45.5% |
| LMArena Coding | 1469 | 1473 |
| FrontierCode | — | 10.2% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1438 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 513.95 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- MiMo-V2.5: —
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 21.4 (#138)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OSWorld 2.0 | — | 2.8% |

## Reasoning

- MiMo-V2.5: 28.6 (#101)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 39.3 (#59)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 3.7% | 9.1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1450 | 1460 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 74.8% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 24% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 17% |
| DTBench | — | 84% |
| LMCA | — | 37.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 147.37 |

## Math

- MiMo-V2.5: 36.8 (#163)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 50.5 (#56)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1436 | 1466 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 34.4% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 93.3% |
| ProofBench | 16% | — |

## Knowledge

- MiMo-V2.5: 40.8 (#115)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.9 (#51)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1460 | 1467 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 87.9% |

## Multimodal

- MiMo-V2.5: 39.8 (#54)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 41.8 (#33)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1247 | 1279 |
| LMArena Document | — | 1444 |

## Multilingual

- MiMo-V2.5: 51.9 (#99)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.8 (#38)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1404 | 1445 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1468 | 1510 |
| LMArena French | 1447 | 1473 |
| LMArena German | 1421 | 1471 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1306 | 1413 |
| LMArena Korean | 1363 | 1415 |
| LMArena Russian | 1395 | 1457 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1416 | 1457 |

## Instruction Following

- MiMo-V2.5: 75.5 (#60)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 75.8 (#52)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1434 | 1440 |

## Long Context

- MiMo-V2.5: 44.2 (#73)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 44.5 (#65)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1445 | 1455 |

## Writing & Preference

- MiMo-V2.5: 61.6 (#86)
- Qwen3.7 Plus: 64.3 (#56)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5 | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1428 | 1455 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1393 | 1439 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1445 | 1460 |

## FAQ

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

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 43.4 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2.5 costs 4.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.7 Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

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

MiMo-V2.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Plus lists at $0.40 and $1.60.

### Is MiMo-V2.5 or Qwen3.7 Plus better for coding?

MiMo-V2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.9 versus 36.6 in the Noometry coding category.

### 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 Plus share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.5 has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Plus has 32.