Model comparison
MiMo-V2.5-Pro vs Qwen3.7 Plus
MiMo-V2.5-Pro and Qwen3.7 Plus score almost the same on the Noometry Index (45.2 vs 45.3), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2.5-Pro scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen3.7 Plus in 3 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.7 Plus leads 54.9 to 42.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 34.4% for MiMo-V2.5-Pro and 74.8% for Qwen3.7 Plus.
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro is cheaper at $0.43 / $0.87 per million input/output tokens, against $0.40 / $1.60 for Qwen3.7 Plus.
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen3.7 Plus | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 45.2 | 45.3 |
| Released | 2026-04-22 | 2026-06-02 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Max output | 131K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.43 | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.87 | $1.60 |
| Results tracked | 27 | 32 |
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), Qwen3.7 Plus: 36.6 (#206)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 50.2% | 45.5% |
| LMArena Coding | 1503 | 1473 |
| FrontierCode | — | 10.2% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1479 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 899.8 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 21.4 (#138)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OSWorld 2.0 | — | 2.8% |
Reasoning Qwen3.7 Plus leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 26.8 (#130), Qwen3.7 Plus: 39.3 (#59)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 34.4% | 74.8% |
| CritPt | 4% | 9.1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1488 | 1460 |
| DTBench | 84.5% | 84% |
| LMCA | 29.5% | 37.6% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 24% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 17% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 147.37 |
Math Qwen3.7 Plus leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 40.0 (#96), Qwen3.7 Plus: 50.5 (#56)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1481 | 1466 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 34.4% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 93.3% |
| ProofBench | 22% | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.7 Plus leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 42.2 (#98), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.9 (#51)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1503 | 1467 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 87.9% |
Multimodal Not comparable
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 41.8 (#33)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1279 |
| LMArena Document | — | 1444 |
Multilingual Too close to call
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 55.1 (#34), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.8 (#38)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1449 | 1445 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1507 | 1510 |
| LMArena French | 1488 | 1473 |
| LMArena German | 1458 | 1471 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1412 | 1413 |
| LMArena Korean | 1437 | 1415 |
| LMArena Russian | 1450 | 1457 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1471 | 1457 |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 77.5 (#21), Qwen3.7 Plus: 75.8 (#52)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1477 | 1440 |
Long Context Too close to call
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 45.4 (#37), Qwen3.7 Plus: 44.5 (#65)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1483 | 1455 |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
MiMo-V2.5-Pro: 65.3 (#49), Qwen3.7 Plus: 64.3 (#56)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1465 | 1455 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1440 | 1439 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1477 | 1460 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1493 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1208 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2.5-Pro better than Qwen3.7 Plus?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro and Qwen3.7 Plus score almost the same on the Noometry Index (45.2 vs 45.3), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2.5-Pro or Qwen3.7 Plus?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is cheaper. It lists at $0.43 per million input tokens and $0.87 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Plus lists at $0.40 and $1.60.
Is MiMo-V2.5-Pro or Qwen3.7 Plus better for coding?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.4 versus 36.6 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2.5-Pro and Qwen3.7 Plus share?
22 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2.5-Pro has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Plus has 32.