# MiMo-V2-Pro vs Qwen3.7 Flash

> MiMo-V2-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.0 to 39.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.7 Flash costs 9.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2-Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mimo-v2-pro-vs-qwen3-7-flash
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 1

## Summary

- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. MiMo-V2-Pro scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.7 Flash in 2 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.7 Flash leads 48.9 to 41.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 25.8% for MiMo-V2-Pro and 43.8% for Qwen3.7 Flash.
- Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper at $0.03 / $0.13 per million input/output tokens, against $0.43 / $0.87 for MiMo-V2-Pro.
- MiMo-V2-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

## Snapshot

| | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 43.0 | 39.9 |
| Rank | 103 | 156 |
| Context | 1.05M | 1M |
| Input $/M | $0.43 | $0.03 |
| Output $/M | $0.87 | $0.13 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 43.8 (#83)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1433 | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1476 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 785.17 | — |

## Reasoning

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 22.1 (#206)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: 28.2 (#108)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 25.8% | 43.8% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 23% |
| Thematic Generalization | 45.9% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1457 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 15% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 144.64 |

## Math

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 39.5 (#102)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: 38.3 (#140)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 19.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 86.7% |
| LMArena Math | 1447 | — |

## Knowledge

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.4 (#111)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: 48.9 (#75)

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 82.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1478 | — |

## Multilingual

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 52.7 (#81)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1416 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1456 | — |
| LMArena French | 1469 | — |
| LMArena German | 1417 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1366 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1400 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1427 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1457 | — |

## Instruction Following

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 76.0 (#49)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1445 | — |

## Long Context

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.5 (#138)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| CL-bench | 15.7% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 6.9% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1455 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- MiMo-V2-Pro: 62.8 (#70)
- Qwen3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Qwen3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1436 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1415 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1456 | — |

## FAQ

### Is MiMo-V2-Pro better than Qwen3.7 Flash?

MiMo-V2-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.0 to 39.9 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.7 Flash costs 9.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2-Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2-Pro or Qwen3.7 Flash?

Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.03 per million input tokens and $0.13 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2-Pro lists at $0.43 and $0.87.

### Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

### How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Pro and Qwen3.7 Flash share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Pro has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Flash has 7.