Model comparison
MiMo-V2-Pro vs QwQ-32B
MiMo-V2-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.4 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. MiMo-V2-Pro scores higher in 6 categories and QwQ-32B in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2-Pro leads 62.9 to 50.9.
- QwQ-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| MiMo-V2-Pro | QwQ-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Xiaomi | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 42.4 | 39.4 |
| Released | 2026-03-18 | 2024-11-28 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | — |
| Max output | 131K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.43 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.87 | — |
| Results tracked | 23 | 36 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding MiMo-V2-Pro leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 43.4 (#76), QwQ-32B: 34.9 (#220)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1476 | 1333 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 20.9% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1433 | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 44.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 72.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54.4% |
| ALE-Bench | 785.17 | — |
Reasoning QwQ-32B leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 21.3 (#200), QwQ-32B: 22.9 (#171)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1457 | 1326 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 25.8% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| Thematic Generalization | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 83.5% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 137.6 |
| ForecastBench | — | 58.3 |
| LiveBench | — | 72% |
Math Too close to call
MiMo-V2-Pro: 36.7 (#104), QwQ-32B: 36.2 (#123)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1447 | 1359 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 59.2% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 77.8% |
Knowledge MiMo-V2-Pro leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 40.8 (#106), QwQ-32B: 37.2 (#150)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1479 | 1323 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.3% |
| Confabulations | — | 15.6% |
Multilingual MiMo-V2-Pro leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 52.9 (#77), QwQ-32B: 45.0 (#171)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1416 | 1306 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1455 | 1378 |
| LMArena French | 1470 | 1337 |
| LMArena German | 1417 | 1313 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1366 | 1263 |
| LMArena Korean | 1401 | 1278 |
| LMArena Russian | 1427 | 1297 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1458 | 1353 |
Instruction Following MiMo-V2-Pro leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 76.2 (#46), QwQ-32B: 72.8 (#131)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1444 | 1297 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 81.8% |
Long Context QwQ-32B leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 41.5 (#133), QwQ-32B: 49.0 (#11)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1455 | 1308 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 83.3% |
| CL-bench | 15.7% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 6.9% | — |
Writing & Preference MiMo-V2-Pro leads
MiMo-V2-Pro: 62.9 (#67), QwQ-32B: 50.9 (#175)
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | QwQ-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1436 | 1329 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1415 | 1288 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1456 | 1314 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 80.2% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1257 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 51.4% |
Frequently asked questions
Is MiMo-V2-Pro better than QwQ-32B?
MiMo-V2-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.4 to 39.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is MiMo-V2-Pro or QwQ-32B better for coding?
MiMo-V2-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.4 versus 34.9 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do MiMo-V2-Pro and QwQ-32B share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. MiMo-V2-Pro has 23 scored results on Noometry and QwQ-32B has 36.