Model comparison

Gemma 2 27B vs MiMo-V2.5

MiMo-V2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.0 to 29.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 2 27B Google

29.2

Rank #302 Confirmed

MiMo-V2.5 Xiaomi

43.0

Rank #89 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 27B scores higher in 0 categories and MiMo-V2.5 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where MiMo-V2.5 leads 35.4 to 10.0.
  • MiMo-V2.5 is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $0.65 / $0.65 for Gemma 2 27B.
  • MiMo-V2.5 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 8K.

Side by side

Gemma 2 27B and MiMo-V2.5 specifications
Gemma 2 27BMiMo-V2.5
ProviderGoogleXiaomi
Noometry Index29.243.0
Released2024-06-242026-04-22
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window8K1.05M
Max output2K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.65$0.14
Output $ / M tokens$0.65$0.28
Results tracked3423

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding MiMo-V2.5 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 33.5 (#243), MiMo-V2.5: 43.6 (#75)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Coding12111469
LMArena WebDev—1438
SciCode—43.1%
BigCodeBench Instruct42.8%—
LiveBench Coding36%—
BigCodeBench Complete52.5%—
ALE-Bench—513.95

Reasoning MiMo-V2.5 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 14.8 (#313), MiMo-V2.5: 27.8 (#98)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Hard Prompts11991450
CritPt—3.7%
LiveBench Reasoning28.1%—
DTBench48%—
LiveBench Data Analysis47.9%—
LMCA7.1%—
Epoch Capabilities Index122.06—
LiveBench38.2%—

Math MiMo-V2.5 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 10.0 (#306), MiMo-V2.5: 35.4 (#145)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Math12121436
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20251.4%—
ProofBench—16%
LiveBench Math26.5%—
MATH Level 527.9%—

Knowledge MiMo-V2.5 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 18.9 (#275), MiMo-V2.5: 40.2 (#109)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Expert11721459
GPQA Diamond36.5%—
Confabulations27.1%—
MMLU75.7%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemma 2 27B: —, MiMo-V2.5: 39.0 (#53)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Vision—1245

Multilingual MiMo-V2.5 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 38.8 (#221), MiMo-V2.5: 52.0 (#96)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Non-English12171404
LMArena Chinese12211467
LMArena French12461447
LMArena German12091421
LMArena Japanese11751304
LMArena Korean11741363
LMArena Russian12341395
LMArena Spanish12281412

Instruction Following MiMo-V2.5 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 60.7 (#244), MiMo-V2.5: 75.7 (#55)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Instruction Following12061433
LiveBench Instruction Following58.1%—

Long Context MiMo-V2.5 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#213), MiMo-V2.5: 44.1 (#69)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Longer Query12311444

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.5 leads

Gemma 2 27B: 44.4 (#220), MiMo-V2.5: 61.8 (#82)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGemma 2 27BMiMo-V2.5
LMArena Text12311427
LMArena Creative Writing12411392
LMArena Multi-Turn12241445
LiveBench Language32.6%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 2 27B better than MiMo-V2.5?

MiMo-V2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.0 to 29.2 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B or MiMo-V2.5?

MiMo-V2.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; Gemma 2 27B lists at $0.65 and $0.65.

Is Gemma 2 27B or MiMo-V2.5 better for coding?

MiMo-V2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.6 versus 33.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2.5 does, with 1.05M tokens against 8K.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 27B and MiMo-V2.5 share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 27B has 34 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.5 has 23.

Related comparisons

Go deeper