Model comparison
Exaone 4.0 32B vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Head-to-head evidence from 11 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Exaone 4.0 32B #170 (Estimated); MiMo-V2.5-Pro #14 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Exaone 4.0 32B and MiMo-V2.5-Pro share 11 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 2 results are unique to Exaone 4.0 32B; 20 to MiMo-V2.5-Pro.
Updated July 21, 2026- Shared results
- 11
- Exaone 4.0 32B only
- 2
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro only
- 20
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick MiMo-V2.5-Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Exaone 4.0 32B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 11 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 70.19 to 40.44. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
MiMo-V2.5-Pro gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for Exaone 4.0 32B.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Exaone 4.0 32B | Δ | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Exaone 4.0 32B81.8 | Margin← 33.8 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro48.0 |
| Agentic | Exaone 4.0 32BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2.5-Pro68.4 |
| Coding | Exaone 4.0 32BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2.5-Pro57.2 |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Exaone 4.0 32B | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Exaone 4.0 32BNot available | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Exaone 4.0 32BNot available | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Exaone 4.0 32BNot available | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Exaone 4.0 32B128K | MiMo-V2.5-Pro1M | MiMo-V2.5-Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic14 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Exaone 4.0 32B | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 4.1% | 94.2% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 63.8% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1265 | Not comparable |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | — | 72.9% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 68.4% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 29.1% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 38.3% | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | — | 2.4% | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 62.70% | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 873 | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | — | 38.2% | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | — | 43.2% | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | — | 65.2% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 73.3% | Not comparable |
Coding4 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
KnowledgeExaone 4.0 32B wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Exaone 4.0 32B | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 81.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 6.0% | 42.2% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 62.8% | 86.6% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| AA-HLESource | 4.9% | 33.8% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -62.3% | 3.6% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 10.4% | 22.6% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 81.0% | 24.5% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| HLESource | — | 48% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 34% | Not comparable |
| AA Openness IndexSource | — | 38.9% | Not comparable |
Math1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Exaone 4.0 32B | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME 2025Source | 85.3% | — | Not comparable |
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Exaone 4.0 32B | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | — | 1298 | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Exaone 4.0 32B | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 33.5% | 79.9% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Exaone 4.0 32B or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 70.19 to 40.44.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Exaone 4.0 32B or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
Exaone 4.0 32B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.8 versus 48. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.