Model comparison

MiMo-V2-Pro vs Qwen3 8B

MiMo-V2-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.0 to 33.7 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 8B costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2-Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

MiMo-V2-Pro Xiaomi

43.0

Rank #103 Confirmed

Qwen3 8B Alibaba (Qwen)

33.7

Rank #238 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in coding, where MiMo-V2-Pro leads 43.8 to 34.0.
  • Qwen3 8B is cheaper at $0.18 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $0.43 / $0.87 for MiMo-V2-Pro.
  • MiMo-V2-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
  • Qwen3 8B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

MiMo-V2-Pro and Qwen3 8B specifications
MiMo-V2-ProQwen3 8B
ProviderXiaomiAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index43.033.7
Released2026-03-182025-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M131K
Max output131K8K
Input $ / M tokens$0.43$0.18
Output $ / M tokens$0.87$0.70
Results tracked2311

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

Category by category

Coding MiMo-V2-Pro leads

MiMo-V2-Pro: 43.8 (#83), Qwen3 8B: 34.0 (#248)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-ProQwen3 8B
LMArena WebDev1433—
SciCode—22.6%
LMArena Coding1476—
ALE-Bench785.17—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

MiMo-V2-Pro: —, Qwen3 8B: 30.2 (#78)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-ProQwen3 8B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—42.6%

Reasoning MiMo-V2-Pro leads

MiMo-V2-Pro: 22.1 (#206), Qwen3 8B: 16.6 (#303)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-ProQwen3 8B
NYT Connections (extended)25.8%—
CritPt—0%
Chess Puzzles—5%
Thematic Generalization45.9%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1457—
DTBench—59.7%
LMCA—8.8%
Epoch Capabilities Index—136.17

Math MiMo-V2-Pro leads

MiMo-V2-Pro: 39.5 (#102), Qwen3 8B: 34.9 (#191)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-ProQwen3 8B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—56.1%
LMArena Math1447—

Knowledge MiMo-V2-Pro leads

MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.4 (#111), Qwen3 8B: 36.1 (#173)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-ProQwen3 8B
GPQA Diamond—56.8%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—4.8%
LMArena Expert1478—

Multilingual Not comparable

MiMo-V2-Pro: 52.7 (#81), Qwen3 8B: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-ProQwen3 8B
LMArena Non-English1416—
LMArena Chinese1456—
LMArena French1469—
LMArena German1417—
LMArena Japanese1366—
LMArena Korean1400—
LMArena Russian1427—
LMArena Spanish1457—

Instruction Following Not comparable

MiMo-V2-Pro: 76.0 (#49), Qwen3 8B: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-ProQwen3 8B
LMArena Instruction Following1445—

Long Context MiMo-V2-Pro leads

MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.5 (#138), Qwen3 8B: 37.9 (#210)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-ProQwen3 8B
Fiction.LiveBench—62.1%
CL-bench15.7%—
CL-bench Life6.9%—
LMArena Longer Query1455—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

MiMo-V2-Pro: 62.8 (#70), Qwen3 8B: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMiMo-V2-ProQwen3 8B
LMArena Text1436—
LMArena Creative Writing1415—
LMArena Multi-Turn1456—

Frequently asked questions

Is MiMo-V2-Pro better than Qwen3 8B?

MiMo-V2-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.0 to 33.7 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 8B costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2-Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, MiMo-V2-Pro or Qwen3 8B?

Qwen3 8B is cheaper. It lists at $0.18 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2-Pro lists at $0.43 and $0.87.

Is MiMo-V2-Pro or Qwen3 8B better for coding?

MiMo-V2-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.8 versus 34.0 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Pro and Qwen3 8B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Pro has 23 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 8B has 11.

Related comparisons

Go deeper