# MiMo-V2-Pro vs Qwen1.5 4b Chat

> MiMo-V2-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.4 to 28.3 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mimo-v2-pro-vs-qwen1-5-4b-chat
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 13

## Summary

- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2-Pro scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5 4b Chat in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2-Pro leads 62.9 to 23.9.
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 42.4 | 28.3 |
| Rank | 102 | 319 |
| Context | 1.05M | — |
| Input $/M | $0.43 | — |
| Output $/M | $0.87 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 43.4 (#76)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 28.6 (#305)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1476 | 999 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1433 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 785.17 | — |

## Reasoning

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 21.3 (#200)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 17.7 (#277)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1457 | 976 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 25.8% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 45.9% | — |

## Math

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 36.7 (#104)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 27.9 (#233)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1447 | 1026 |

## Knowledge

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 40.8 (#106)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 26.2 (#252)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1479 | 980 |

## Multilingual

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 52.9 (#77)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 24.2 (#285)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1416 | 979 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1455 | 1024 |
| LMArena German | 1417 | 902 |
| LMArena Russian | 1427 | 952 |
| LMArena French | 1470 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1366 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1401 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1458 | — |

## Instruction Following

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 76.2 (#46)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 49.3 (#295)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1444 | 979 |

## Long Context

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.5 (#133)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.1 (#285)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1455 | 988 |
| CL-bench | 15.7% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 6.9% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 62.9 (#67)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 23.9 (#304)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1436 | 997 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1415 | 969 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1456 | 977 |

## FAQ

### Is MiMo-V2-Pro better than Qwen1.5 4b Chat?

MiMo-V2-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.4 to 28.3 on the Noometry Index.

### Is MiMo-V2-Pro or Qwen1.5 4b Chat better for coding?

MiMo-V2-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.4 versus 28.6 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Pro and Qwen1.5 4b Chat share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Pro has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5 4b Chat has 13.