# MiMo-V2-Pro vs Qwen3 14B

> MiMo-V2-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.4 to 35.0 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mimo-v2-pro-vs-qwen3-14b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in coding, where MiMo-V2-Pro leads 43.4 to 36.7.
- MiMo-V2-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $0.35 / $1.40 for Qwen3 14B.
- MiMo-V2-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
- Qwen3 14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 42.4 | 35.0 |
| Rank | 102 | 222 |
| Context | 1.05M | 131K |
| Input $/M | $0.43 | $0.35 |
| Output $/M | $0.87 | $1.40 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 43.4 (#76)
- Qwen3 14B: 36.7 (#191)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1433 | — |
| SciCode | — | 31.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1476 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 785.17 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- MiMo-V2-Pro: —
- Qwen3 14B: 29.4 (#78)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 41% |

## Reasoning

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 21.3 (#200)
- Qwen3 14B: 18.1 (#272)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 49.1% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 25.8% | — |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 4% |
| Thematic Generalization | 45.9% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1457 | — |
| DTBench | — | 64% |
| LMCA | — | 18.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 138.23 |

## Math

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 36.7 (#104)
- Qwen3 14B: 37.0 (#102)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 66.4% |
| LMArena Math | 1447 | — |

## Knowledge

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 40.8 (#106)
- Qwen3 14B: 39.2 (#124)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 63.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1479 | — |

## Multilingual

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 52.9 (#77)
- Qwen3 14B: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1416 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1455 | — |
| LMArena French | 1470 | — |
| LMArena German | 1417 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1366 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1401 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1427 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1458 | — |

## Instruction Following

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 76.2 (#46)
- Qwen3 14B: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1444 | — |

## Long Context

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.5 (#133)
- Qwen3 14B: 38.0 (#201)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 62.5% |
| CL-bench | 15.7% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 6.9% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1455 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 62.9 (#67)
- Qwen3 14B: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3 14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1436 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1415 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1456 | — |

## FAQ

### Is MiMo-V2-Pro better than Qwen3 14B?

MiMo-V2-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.4 to 35.0 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2-Pro or Qwen3 14B?

MiMo-V2-Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.43 per million input tokens and $0.87 per million output tokens; Qwen3 14B lists at $0.35 and $1.40.

### Is MiMo-V2-Pro or Qwen3 14B better for coding?

MiMo-V2-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.4 versus 36.7 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.

### How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Pro and Qwen3 14B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Pro has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 14B has 12.