Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Pro vs MiMo-V2-Flash
Head-to-head evidence from 17 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Gemini 2.5 Pro #70 (Supported); MiMo-V2-Flash #91 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemini 2.5 Pro and MiMo-V2-Flash share 17 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 7 results are unique to Gemini 2.5 Pro; 2 to MiMo-V2-Flash.
Updated July 20, 2026- Shared results
- 17
- Gemini 2.5 Pro only
- 7
- MiMo-V2-Flash only
- 2
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick Gemini 2.5 Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MiMo-V2-Flash only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 17 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Gemini 2.5 Pro is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 57.25 to 54.06. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Gemini 2.5 Pro is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.25 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for MiMo-V2-Flash. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. MiMo-V2-Flash is the reasoning model in the pair, while Gemini 2.5 Pro is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Gemini 2.5 Pro gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for MiMo-V2-Flash.
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 | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Δ | MiMo-V2-Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Gemini 2.5 Pro27.4 | Margin→ 57.3 | MiMo-V2-Flash84.7 |
| Coding | Gemini 2.5 Pro63.8 | Margin→ 9.6 | MiMo-V2-Flash73.4 |
| Math | Gemini 2.5 Pro11.6 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2-FlashNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 63.8%B 73.4%Winner: MiMo-V2-FlashΔ 9.6SWE-bench Verified: Gemini 2.5 Pro scored 63.8%; MiMo-V2-Flash scored 73.4%. MiMo-V2-Flash wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 83%B 83.7%Winner: MiMo-V2-FlashΔ 0.7GPQA: Gemini 2.5 Pro scored 83%; MiMo-V2-Flash scored 83.7%. MiMo-V2-Flash wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Gemini 2.5 Pro | MiMo-V2-Flash | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemini 2.5 Pro$1.25 input / $10 output | MiMo-V2-Flash$0 input / $0 output | MiMo-V2-Flash has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemini 2.5 Pro117 tok/s | MiMo-V2-Flash129 tok/s | MiMo-V2-Flash has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemini 2.5 Pro21.19 s | MiMo-V2-Flash2.14 s | MiMo-V2-Flash reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemini 2.5 Pro1M | MiMo-V2-Flash256K | Gemini 2.5 Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic5 benchmarks
CodingMiMo-V2-Flash wins4 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
KnowledgeMiMo-V2-Flash wins9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 83% | 83.7% | MiMo-V2-Flash leads |
| HLESource | 18.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 25.8% | 24.7% | Gemini 2.5 Pro leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 84.4% | 65.6% | Gemini 2.5 Pro leads |
| AA-HLESource | 21.1% | 8.0% | Gemini 2.5 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -14.3% | -48.5% | Gemini 2.5 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 39.0% | 15.2% | Gemini 2.5 Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 87.4% | 75.1% | MiMo-V2-Flash leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 84.9% | Not comparable |
Math3 benchmarks
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Pro | MiMo-V2-Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 48.7% | 39.9% | Gemini 2.5 Pro leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, Gemini 2.5 Pro or MiMo-V2-Flash?
Gemini 2.5 Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 57.25 to 54.06. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 63.8% and 73.4%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Gemini 2.5 Pro or MiMo-V2-Flash?
MiMo-V2-Flash has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 84.7 versus 27.4. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Gemini 2.5 Pro or MiMo-V2-Flash?
MiMo-V2-Flash has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 73.4 versus 63.8. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
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.