# MiMo-V2-Flash vs Qwen1.5-7B

> MiMo-V2-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mimo-v2-flash-vs-qwen1-5-7b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 12

## Summary

- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2-Flash scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-7B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2-Flash leads 59.7 to 29.6.

## Snapshot

| | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.3 | 31.4 |
| Rank | 138 | 273 |
| Context | 262K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.14 | — |
| Output $/M | $0.28 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- MiMo-V2-Flash: 36.1 (#211)
- Qwen1.5-7B: 32.2 (#276)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1443 | 1107 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1330 | — |
| SciCode | 25.9% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 737.95 | — |

## Reasoning

- MiMo-V2-Flash: 24.9 (#157)
- Qwen1.5-7B: 20.4 (#240)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1420 | 1065 |
| CritPt | 0% | — |

## Math

- MiMo-V2-Flash: 38.3 (#139)
- Qwen1.5-7B: 31.4 (#224)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1396 | 1080 |

## Knowledge

- MiMo-V2-Flash: 39.7 (#131)
- Qwen1.5-7B: 28.7 (#243)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1425 | 1055 |
| MMLU | — | 62.6% |

## Multilingual

- MiMo-V2-Flash: 51.0 (#113)
- Qwen1.5-7B: 28.5 (#271)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1392 | 1058 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1462 | 1141 |
| LMArena Russian | 1387 | 1006 |
| LMArena French | 1429 | — |
| LMArena German | 1395 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1325 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1358 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1420 | — |

## Instruction Following

- MiMo-V2-Flash: 73.5 (#120)
- Qwen1.5-7B: 54.1 (#281)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1392 | 1058 |

## Long Context

- MiMo-V2-Flash: 43.0 (#110)
- Qwen1.5-7B: 33.1 (#266)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1409 | 1090 |

## Writing & Preference

- MiMo-V2-Flash: 59.7 (#106)
- Qwen1.5-7B: 29.6 (#293)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1411 | 1083 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1375 | 1035 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1404 | 1062 |

## FAQ

### Is MiMo-V2-Flash better than Qwen1.5-7B?

MiMo-V2-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Is MiMo-V2-Flash or Qwen1.5-7B better for coding?

MiMo-V2-Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.1 versus 32.2 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Flash and Qwen1.5-7B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Flash has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-7B has 13.