Head-to-head comparison across 3benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Gemini 3.5 Flash
88
MiMo-V2.5
71
Verified leaderboard positions: Gemini 3.5 Flash #7 · MiMo-V2.5 unranked
Pick Gemini 3.5 Flash if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MiMo-V2.5 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.
Agentic
+11.4 difference
Coding
+1.6 difference
Multimodal
+4.9 difference
Gemini 3.5 Flash
MiMo-V2.5
$1.5 / $9
$null / $null
284.2 t/s
N/A
18.55s
N/A
1M
1M
Pick Gemini 3.5 Flash if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MiMo-V2.5 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.
Gemini 3.5 Flash is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 88 to 71. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Gemini 3.5 Flash's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 77.2 against 65.8. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 76.2% to 65.8%. MiMo-V2.5 does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Gemini 3.5 Flash is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 88 to 71. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 76.2% and 65.8%.
MiMo-V2.5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 56.1 versus 54.5. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Gemini 3.5 Flash has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 77.2 versus 65.8. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Gemini 3.5 Flash has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 83.8 versus 78.9. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.