# MiMo-V2.6-Pro vs Qwen2.5 32B Instruct

> MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.7 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mimo-v2-6-pro-vs-qwen2-5-32b-instruct
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in math, where MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads 37.9 to 15.3.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $0.70 / $2.80 for Qwen2.5 32B Instruct.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.

## Snapshot

| | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 46.7 | 29.7 |
| Rank | 55 | 291 |
| Context | 1.05M | 131K |
| Input $/M | $0.43 | $0.70 |
| Output $/M | $0.87 | $2.80 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 53.2 (#27)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 38.1 (#165)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1618 | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 45% |
| LMArena Coding | 1538 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 52.3% |

## Reasoning

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 30.4 (#76)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 18.5 (#262)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1511 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 128.52 |

## Math

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 37.9 (#91)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 15.3 (#289)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 7.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1497 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 56.1% |

## Knowledge

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.0 (#85)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: 24.9 (#259)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 46.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1548 | — |

## Multimodal

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 40.2 (#40)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1265 | — |

## Multilingual

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 57.0 (#15)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1474 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1532 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1481 | — |

## Instruction Following

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 78.2 (#10)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1490 | — |

## Long Context

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 46.0 (#26)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1500 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 66.9 (#32)
- Qwen2.5 32B Instruct: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen2.5 32B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1491 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1465 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1463 | — |

## FAQ

### Is MiMo-V2.6-Pro better than Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.7 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.6-Pro or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.43 per million input tokens and $0.87 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 32B Instruct lists at $0.70 and $2.80.

### Is MiMo-V2.6-Pro or Qwen2.5 32B Instruct better for coding?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.2 versus 38.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.

### How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.6-Pro and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 32B Instruct has 7.