# MiMo-V2.6-Pro vs Qwen2.5 Plus 1127

> MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.7 to 38.1 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mimo-v2-6-pro-vs-qwen2-5-plus
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 12

## Summary

- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads 66.9 to 49.5.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 46.7 | 38.1 |
| Rank | 55 | 179 |
| Context | 1.05M | — |
| Input $/M | $0.43 | — |
| Output $/M | $0.87 | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 53.2 (#27)
- Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 37.9 (#171)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1538 | 1314 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1618 | — |

## Reasoning

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 30.4 (#76)
- Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 24.8 (#139)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1511 | 1299 |

## Math

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 37.9 (#91)
- Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 33.5 (#175)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1497 | 1298 |

## Knowledge

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.0 (#85)
- Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 34.9 (#179)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1548 | 1289 |

## Multimodal

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 40.2 (#40)
- Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1265 | — |

## Multilingual

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 57.0 (#15)
- Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 42.1 (#196)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1474 | 1265 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1532 | 1314 |
| LMArena Russian | 1481 | 1271 |
| LMArena German | — | 1231 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1207 |

## Instruction Following

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 78.2 (#10)
- Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.4 (#194)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1490 | 1275 |

## Long Context

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 46.0 (#26)
- Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#180)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1500 | 1292 |

## Writing & Preference

- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 66.9 (#32)
- Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.5 (#186)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1491 | 1299 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1465 | 1262 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1463 | 1299 |

## FAQ

### Is MiMo-V2.6-Pro better than Qwen2.5 Plus 1127?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.7 to 38.1 on the Noometry Index.

### Is MiMo-V2.6-Pro or Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better for coding?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.2 versus 37.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.6-Pro and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14.