Model comparison
GPT-5.3 Chat vs MiMo-V2-Flash
GPT-5.3 Chat is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.1 to 40.8 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2-Flash costs 27× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.3 Chat's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.3 Chat scores higher in 3 categories and MiMo-V2-Flash in 5 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where GPT-5.3 Chat leads 40.8 to 35.8.
- MiMo-V2-Flash is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $1.75 / $14 for GPT-5.3 Chat.
- MiMo-V2-Flash accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 128K.
- MiMo-V2-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-5.3 Chat | MiMo-V2-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 42.1 | 40.8 |
| Released | 2026-03-03 | 2025-12-16 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 128K | 262K |
| Max output | 16K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.75 | $0.14 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $14 | $0.28 |
| Results tracked | 18 | 21 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-5.3 Chat leads
GPT-5.3 Chat: 40.8 (#124), MiMo-V2-Flash: 35.8 (#205)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.3 Chat | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1408 | 1443 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1330 |
| SciCode | — | 25.9% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 737.95 |
Reasoning GPT-5.3 Chat leads
GPT-5.3 Chat: 27.3 (#105), MiMo-V2-Flash: 24.1 (#155)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.3 Chat | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1399 | 1420 |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
Math Too close to call
GPT-5.3 Chat: 35.4 (#146), MiMo-V2-Flash: 35.6 (#141)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.3 Chat | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1389 | 1396 |
Knowledge Too close to call
GPT-5.3 Chat: 38.2 (#137), MiMo-V2-Flash: 39.1 (#126)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.3 Chat | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1397 | 1425 |
Multilingual Too close to call
GPT-5.3 Chat: 50.5 (#119), MiMo-V2-Flash: 51.1 (#109)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.3 Chat | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1383 | 1391 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1433 | 1463 |
| LMArena French | 1398 | 1429 |
| LMArena German | 1384 | 1395 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1351 | 1324 |
| LMArena Korean | 1347 | 1358 |
| LMArena Russian | 1400 | 1387 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1371 | 1420 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
GPT-5.3 Chat: 73.0 (#124), MiMo-V2-Flash: 73.7 (#115)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.3 Chat | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1378 | 1392 |
Long Context Too close to call
GPT-5.3 Chat: 42.6 (#115), MiMo-V2-Flash: 43.0 (#106)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.3 Chat | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1396 | 1409 |
Writing & Preference GPT-5.3 Chat leads
GPT-5.3 Chat: 63.3 (#65), MiMo-V2-Flash: 59.9 (#101)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.3 Chat | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1389 | 1411 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1356 | 1375 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1413 | 1404 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1690 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.3 Chat better than MiMo-V2-Flash?
GPT-5.3 Chat is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.1 to 40.8 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2-Flash costs 27× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.3 Chat's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.3 Chat 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; GPT-5.3 Chat lists at $1.75 and $14.
Is GPT-5.3 Chat or MiMo-V2-Flash better for coding?
GPT-5.3 Chat scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.8 versus 35.8 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2-Flash does, with 262K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.3 Chat and MiMo-V2-Flash share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.3 Chat has 18 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2-Flash has 21.