Noometry

Model comparison

MiMo-V2-Flash vs Qwen3 Max

Qwen3 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 40.8 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2-Flash costs 14× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

MiMo-V2-Flash Xiaomi

40.8

Rank #137 Confirmed

Qwen3 Max Alibaba (Qwen)

43.5

Rank #82 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2-Flash scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3 Max in 6 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3 Max leads 48.1 to 39.1.
  • MiMo-V2-Flash is cheaper at $0.14 / $0.28 per million input/output tokens, against $1.20 / $6 for Qwen3 Max.
  • MiMo-V2-Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

MiMo-V2-FlashQwen3 Max
ProviderXiaomiAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index40.843.5
Released2025-12-162025-09-23
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window262K262K
Max output66K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.14$1.20
Output $ / M tokens$0.28$6
Results tracked2133

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3 Max leads

MiMo-V2-Flash: 35.8 (#205), Qwen3 Max: 42.4 (#93)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-FlashQwen3 Max
LMArena Coding14431456
ALE-Bench737.95370.45
LMArena WebDev1330—
SciCode25.9%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

MiMo-V2-Flash: —, Qwen3 Max: —

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-FlashQwen3 Max
Vending-Bench 2—71.56

Reasoning MiMo-V2-Flash leads

MiMo-V2-Flash: 24.1 (#155), Qwen3 Max: 22.0 (#186)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-FlashQwen3 Max
LMArena Hard Prompts14201448
Kagi LLM Benchmark—72.5%
NYT Connections (extended)—30.1%
CritPt0%—
Chess Puzzles—4%
Mystery Game Puzzles—5%
DTBench—82.1%
LMCA—28.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index—142.41

Math Qwen3 Max leads

MiMo-V2-Flash: 35.6 (#141), Qwen3 Max: 37.6 (#94)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-FlashQwen3 Max
LMArena Math13961447
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—18.9%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—73.3%
MATH Level 5—97.1%

Knowledge Qwen3 Max leads

MiMo-V2-Flash: 39.1 (#126), Qwen3 Max: 48.1 (#72)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-FlashQwen3 Max
LMArena Expert14251457
GPQA Diamond—72.6%
SimpleQA Verified—48.7%

Multilingual Qwen3 Max leads

MiMo-V2-Flash: 51.1 (#109), Qwen3 Max: 53.9 (#58)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-FlashQwen3 Max
LMArena Non-English13911429
LMArena Chinese14631479
LMArena French14291450
LMArena German13951463
LMArena Japanese13241399
LMArena Korean13581397
LMArena Russian13871428
LMArena Spanish14201463

Instruction Following Qwen3 Max leads

MiMo-V2-Flash: 73.7 (#115), Qwen3 Max: 75.0 (#81)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-FlashQwen3 Max
LMArena Instruction Following13921420

Long Context MiMo-V2-Flash leads

MiMo-V2-Flash: 43.0 (#106), Qwen3 Max: 41.6 (#129)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-FlashQwen3 Max
LMArena Longer Query14091439
Fiction.LiveBench—66.7%
CL-bench—14.5%

Writing & Preference Qwen3 Max leads

MiMo-V2-Flash: 59.9 (#101), Qwen3 Max: 62.6 (#72)

BenchmarkMiMo-V2-FlashQwen3 Max
LMArena Text14111439
LMArena Creative Writing13751401
LMArena Multi-Turn14041446

Frequently asked questions

Is MiMo-V2-Flash better than Qwen3 Max?

Qwen3 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 40.8 on the Noometry Index. MiMo-V2-Flash costs 14× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2-Flash or Qwen3 Max?

MiMo-V2-Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens; Qwen3 Max lists at $1.20 and $6.

Is MiMo-V2-Flash or Qwen3 Max better for coding?

Qwen3 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.4 versus 35.8 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 262K tokens.

How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Flash and Qwen3 Max share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Flash has 21 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 Max has 33.

Related comparisons

Go deeper