Model comparison
MiMo-V2.5-Pro vs o4-mini
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.2 to 41.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.5-Pro scores higher in 5 categories and o4-mini in 3 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads 65.3 to 54.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 84.5% for MiMo-V2.5-Pro and 77.6% for o4-mini.
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $1.10 / $4.40 for o4-mini.
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 200K.
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2.5-Pro | o4-mini | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 45.2 | 41.6 |
| Released | 2026-04-22 | 2025-04-16 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 200K |
| Max output | 131K | 100K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.43 | $1.10 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.87 | $4.40 |
| Results tracked | 27 | 60 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 47.4 (#60), o4-mini: 40.9 (#127)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | o4-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1503 | 1368 |
| ALE-Bench | 899.8 | 826.17 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 45% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 72% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1479 | — |
| SciCode | 50.2% | — |
| GSO | — | 3.6% |
| WeirdML | — | 52.6% |
| CadEval | — | 62% |
| AlgoTune | — | 1.72 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: —, o4-mini: 32.6 (#61)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | o4-mini |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 53.2% |
| GDPval | — | 25.3% |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 63.9% |
Reasoning MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 26.8 (#130), o4-mini: 24.6 (#162)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | o4-mini |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 4% | 0.6% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1488 | 1351 |
| DTBench | 84.5% | 77.6% |
| LMCA | 29.5% | 26.5% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 6.1% |
| SimpleBench | — | 38.7% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 67.6% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 34.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 58.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 26% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 9.2% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 145.64 |
| ForecastBench | — | 61.8 |
Math Too close to call
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 40.0 (#96), o4-mini: 40.8 (#89)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | o4-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1481 | 1389 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 36.1% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 4.9% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 81.7% |
| ProofBench | 22% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 72% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 97.8% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 24.8% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 6.3% |
Knowledge o4-mini leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 42.2 (#98), o4-mini: 43.6 (#91)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | o4-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1503 | 1343 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 79.6% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 18.1% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 19.6% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 82% |
| Confabulations | — | 15.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 18.6% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 73.5% |
Multimodal Not comparable
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: —, o4-mini: 40.2 (#49)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | o4-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1194 |
| GeoBench | — | 64% |
| VPCT | — | 57.5% |
Multilingual MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 55.1 (#34), o4-mini: 47.0 (#154)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | o4-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1449 | 1337 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1507 | 1354 |
| LMArena French | 1488 | 1364 |
| LMArena German | 1458 | 1336 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1412 | 1308 |
| LMArena Korean | 1437 | 1312 |
| LMArena Russian | 1450 | 1334 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1471 | 1347 |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 77.5 (#21), o4-mini: 75.2 (#68)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | o4-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1477 | 1321 |
| IFEval | — | 92.8% |
Long Context Too close to call
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 45.4 (#37), o4-mini: 45.5 (#33)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | o4-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1483 | 1315 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 77.8% |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 65.3 (#49), o4-mini: 54.0 (#152)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | o4-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1465 | 1353 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1440 | 1294 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1477 | 1350 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 75% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1493 | — |
| WildBench | — | 85.4% |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1208 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2.5-Pro better than o4-mini?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.2 to 41.6 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.5-Pro or o4-mini?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.43 per million input tokens and $0.87 per million output tokens; o4-mini lists at $1.10 and $4.40.
Is MiMo-V2.5-Pro or o4-mini better for coding?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.4 versus 40.9 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.5-Pro and o4-mini share?
21 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.5-Pro has 27 scored results on Noometry and o4-mini has 60.