# MiMo-V2-Flash vs Qwen1.5-110B

> MiMo-V2-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mimo-v2-flash-vs-qwen1-5-110b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 17

## Summary

- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2-Flash scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-110B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2-Flash leads 59.9 to 38.1.

## Snapshot

| | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 40.8 | 33.6 |
| Rank | 137 | 231 |
| Context | 262K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.14 | — |
| Output $/M | $0.28 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- MiMo-V2-Flash: 35.8 (#205)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 32.4 (#260)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1443 | 1184 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1330 | — |
| SciCode | 25.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 35% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 44.4% |
| ALE-Bench | 737.95 | — |

## Reasoning

- MiMo-V2-Flash: 24.1 (#155)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 21.7 (#192)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1420 | 1168 |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 57.7 |

## Math

- MiMo-V2-Flash: 35.6 (#141)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 31.1 (#199)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1396 | 1185 |

## Knowledge

- MiMo-V2-Flash: 39.1 (#126)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 30.7 (#217)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1425 | 1144 |

## Multilingual

- MiMo-V2-Flash: 51.1 (#109)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 33.8 (#245)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1391 | 1142 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1463 | 1206 |
| LMArena French | 1429 | 1150 |
| LMArena German | 1395 | 1123 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1324 | 1074 |
| LMArena Korean | 1358 | 1044 |
| LMArena Russian | 1387 | 1118 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1420 | 1141 |

## Instruction Following

- MiMo-V2-Flash: 73.7 (#115)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 60.6 (#247)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1392 | 1158 |

## Long Context

- MiMo-V2-Flash: 43.0 (#106)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 35.0 (#237)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1409 | 1157 |

## Writing & Preference

- MiMo-V2-Flash: 59.9 (#101)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 38.1 (#250)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1411 | 1175 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1375 | 1148 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1404 | 1160 |

## FAQ

### Is MiMo-V2-Flash better than Qwen1.5-110B?

MiMo-V2-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index.

### Is MiMo-V2-Flash or Qwen1.5-110B better for coding?

MiMo-V2-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.8 versus 32.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Flash and Qwen1.5-110B share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Flash has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-110B has 20.