# MiMo-V2-Omni vs Qwen1.5-72B

> MiMo-V2-Omni is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.6 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mimo-v2-omni-vs-qwen1-5-72b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 17

## Summary

- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2-Omni scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-72B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where MiMo-V2-Omni leads 40.5 to 11.5.
- Qwen1.5-72B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 43.6 | 30.8 |
| Rank | 88 | 285 |
| Context | 262K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.14 | — |
| Output $/M | $0.28 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- MiMo-V2-Omni: 43.3 (#89)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 31.9 (#277)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1466 | 1165 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 33.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 40.3% |
| HumanEval+ | — | 59.1% |
| MBPP+ | — | 61.6% |

## Reasoning

- MiMo-V2-Omni: 29.7 (#88)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 22.2 (#203)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1445 | 1148 |

## Math

- MiMo-V2-Omni: 39.1 (#115)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 33.2 (#205)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1430 | 1164 |

## Knowledge

- MiMo-V2-Omni: 40.5 (#118)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 11.5 (#300)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1449 | 1136 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 28.8% |

## Multimodal

- MiMo-V2-Omni: 38.6 (#63)
- Qwen1.5-72B: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1228 | — |

## Multilingual

- MiMo-V2-Omni: 51.8 (#102)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 33.2 (#253)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1404 | 1135 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1465 | 1186 |
| LMArena French | 1447 | 1159 |
| LMArena German | 1399 | 1084 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1317 | 1061 |
| LMArena Korean | 1355 | 1050 |
| LMArena Russian | 1412 | 1104 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1434 | 1110 |

## Instruction Following

- MiMo-V2-Omni: 75.2 (#66)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 59.3 (#256)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1428 | 1141 |

## Long Context

- MiMo-V2-Omni: 44.1 (#76)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 35.1 (#243)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1442 | 1157 |

## Writing & Preference

- MiMo-V2-Omni: 61.4 (#87)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 37.3 (#258)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Omni | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1423 | 1166 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1392 | 1137 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1445 | 1160 |

## FAQ

### Is MiMo-V2-Omni better than Qwen1.5-72B?

MiMo-V2-Omni is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.6 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

### Is MiMo-V2-Omni or Qwen1.5-72B better for coding?

MiMo-V2-Omni scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.3 versus 31.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Omni and Qwen1.5-72B share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Omni has 18 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-72B has 22.