Model comparison

GLM-4.5V vs MiMo-V2-Flash

MiMo-V2-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

GLM-4.5V Z.ai (Zhipu)

39.2

Rank #158 Confirmed

MiMo-V2-Flash Xiaomi

40.8

Rank #137 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.5V scores higher in 2 categories and MiMo-V2-Flash in 6 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2-Flash leads 59.9 to 52.7.
  • MiMo-V2-Flash is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $1.80 for GLM-4.5V.
  • MiMo-V2-Flash accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 64K.

Side by side

GLM-4.5V and MiMo-V2-Flash specifications
GLM-4.5VMiMo-V2-Flash
ProviderZ.ai (Zhipu)Xiaomi
Noometry Index39.240.8
Released2025-08-112025-12-16
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window64K262K
Max output16K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.60$0.14
Output $ / M tokens$1.80$0.28
Results tracked1521

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-4.5V leads

GLM-4.5V: 38.9 (#152), MiMo-V2-Flash: 35.8 (#205)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VMiMo-V2-Flash
LMArena Coding13471443
LMArena WebDev—1330
SciCode—25.9%
ALE-Bench—737.95

Reasoning GLM-4.5V leads

GLM-4.5V: 26.5 (#118), MiMo-V2-Flash: 24.1 (#155)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VMiMo-V2-Flash
LMArena Hard Prompts13351420
Kagi LLM Benchmark59.8%—
CritPt—0%

Math Too close to call

GLM-4.5V: 34.7 (#157), MiMo-V2-Flash: 35.6 (#141)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VMiMo-V2-Flash
LMArena Math13531396

Knowledge MiMo-V2-Flash leads

GLM-4.5V: 36.8 (#155), MiMo-V2-Flash: 39.1 (#126)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VMiMo-V2-Flash
LMArena Expert13531425

Multimodal Not comparable

GLM-4.5V: 33.6 (#86), MiMo-V2-Flash: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VMiMo-V2-Flash
LMArena Vision1154—

Multilingual MiMo-V2-Flash leads

GLM-4.5V: 44.9 (#172), MiMo-V2-Flash: 51.1 (#109)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VMiMo-V2-Flash
LMArena Non-English13041391
LMArena Chinese13381463
LMArena Russian12991387
LMArena Spanish13351420
LMArena French—1429
LMArena German—1395
LMArena Japanese—1324
LMArena Korean—1358

Instruction Following MiMo-V2-Flash leads

GLM-4.5V: 69.4 (#170), MiMo-V2-Flash: 73.7 (#115)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VMiMo-V2-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following13111392

Long Context MiMo-V2-Flash leads

GLM-4.5V: 39.6 (#166), MiMo-V2-Flash: 43.0 (#106)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VMiMo-V2-Flash
LMArena Longer Query13051409

Writing & Preference MiMo-V2-Flash leads

GLM-4.5V: 52.7 (#162), MiMo-V2-Flash: 59.9 (#101)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGLM-4.5VMiMo-V2-Flash
LMArena Text13331411
LMArena Creative Writing12951375
LMArena Multi-Turn13331404

Frequently asked questions

Is GLM-4.5V better than MiMo-V2-Flash?

MiMo-V2-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 39.2 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, GLM-4.5V or MiMo-V2-Flash?

MiMo-V2-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; GLM-4.5V lists at $0.60 and $1.80.

Is GLM-4.5V or MiMo-V2-Flash better for coding?

GLM-4.5V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.9 versus 35.8 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2-Flash does, with 262K tokens against 64K.

How many benchmarks do GLM-4.5V and MiMo-V2-Flash share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.5V has 15 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2-Flash has 21.

Related comparisons

Go deeper