# MiMo-V2-Flash vs Qwen3.5-9B

> MiMo-V2-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 33.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5-9B costs 1.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2-Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mimo-v2-flash-vs-qwen3-5-9b
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 2

## Summary

- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2-Flash scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3.5-9B in 1 category; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.5-9B leads 46.0 to 39.7.
- Qwen3.5-9B is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $0.14 / $0.28 for MiMo-V2-Flash.

## Snapshot

| | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.3 | 33.8 |
| Rank | 138 | 236 |
| Context | 262K | 262K |
| Input $/M | $0.14 | $0.10 |
| Output $/M | $0.28 | $0.15 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- MiMo-V2-Flash: 36.1 (#211)
- Qwen3.5-9B: 35.9 (#217)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 25.9% | 27.5% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1330 | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1443 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 737.95 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- MiMo-V2-Flash: —
- Qwen3.5-9B: 14.5 (#151)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 9.2% |

## Reasoning

- MiMo-V2-Flash: 24.9 (#157)
- Qwen3.5-9B: 23.1 (#182)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 12% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1420 | — |
| DTBench | — | 71.2% |
| LMCA | — | 24.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 139.46 |

## Math

- MiMo-V2-Flash: 38.3 (#139)
- Qwen3.5-9B: 34.8 (#192)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 48.5% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 61.7% |
| LMArena Math | 1396 | — |

## Knowledge

- MiMo-V2-Flash: 39.7 (#131)
- Qwen3.5-9B: 46.0 (#84)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 79% |
| LMArena Expert | 1425 | — |

## Multilingual

- MiMo-V2-Flash: 51.0 (#113)
- Qwen3.5-9B: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1392 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1462 | — |
| LMArena French | 1429 | — |
| LMArena German | 1395 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1325 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1358 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1387 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1420 | — |

## Instruction Following

- MiMo-V2-Flash: 73.5 (#120)
- Qwen3.5-9B: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1392 | — |

## Long Context

- MiMo-V2-Flash: 43.0 (#110)
- Qwen3.5-9B: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1409 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- MiMo-V2-Flash: 59.7 (#106)
- Qwen3.5-9B: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Qwen3.5-9B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1411 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1375 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1404 | — |

## FAQ

### Is MiMo-V2-Flash better than Qwen3.5-9B?

MiMo-V2-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 33.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5-9B costs 1.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2-Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2-Flash or Qwen3.5-9B?

Qwen3.5-9B is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2-Flash lists at $0.14 and $0.28.

### Is MiMo-V2-Flash or Qwen3.5-9B better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (36.1 vs 35.9); test both on your own repository before choosing.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 262K tokens.

### How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Flash and Qwen3.5-9B share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Flash has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-9B has 10.