Model comparison
GLM-4.6V vs MiMo-V2.5
MiMo-V2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.0 to 40.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6V scores higher in 0 categories and MiMo-V2.5 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2.5 leads 61.8 to 56.8.
- MiMo-V2.5 is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $0.90 for GLM-4.6V.
- MiMo-V2.5 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 128K.
Side by side
| GLM-4.6V | MiMo-V2.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 40.9 | 43.0 |
| Released | 2025-12-08 | 2026-04-22 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 128K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 33K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $0.14 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.90 | $0.28 |
| Results tracked | 12 | 23 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2.5 leads
GLM-4.6V: 40.2 (#128), MiMo-V2.5: 43.6 (#75)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1390 | 1469 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1438 |
| SciCode | — | 43.1% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 513.95 |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.5 leads
GLM-4.6V: 26.5 (#117), MiMo-V2.5: 27.8 (#98)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1368 | 1450 |
| CritPt | — | 3.7% |
Math Not comparable
GLM-4.6V: —, MiMo-V2.5: 35.4 (#145)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | — | 16% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1436 |
Knowledge MiMo-V2.5 leads
GLM-4.6V: 37.4 (#148), MiMo-V2.5: 40.2 (#109)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1372 | 1459 |
Multimodal MiMo-V2.5 leads
GLM-4.6V: 34.2 (#83), MiMo-V2.5: 39.0 (#53)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | 1245 |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.5 leads
GLM-4.6V: 48.8 (#135), MiMo-V2.5: 52.0 (#96)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | 1404 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1426 | 1467 |
| LMArena Russian | 1341 | 1395 |
| LMArena French | — | 1447 |
| LMArena German | — | 1421 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1304 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1363 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1412 |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.5 leads
GLM-4.6V: 71.6 (#145), MiMo-V2.5: 75.7 (#55)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1351 | 1433 |
Long Context MiMo-V2.5 leads
GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#138), MiMo-V2.5: 44.1 (#69)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1358 | 1444 |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.5 leads
GLM-4.6V: 56.8 (#132), MiMo-V2.5: 61.8 (#82)
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6V | MiMo-V2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1427 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1347 | 1392 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1359 | 1445 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-4.6V better than MiMo-V2.5?
MiMo-V2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.0 to 40.9 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, GLM-4.6V 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; GLM-4.6V lists at $0.30 and $0.90.
Is GLM-4.6V or MiMo-V2.5 better for coding?
MiMo-V2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.6 versus 40.2 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.5 does, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6V and MiMo-V2.5 share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6V has 12 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.5 has 23.