Head-to-head comparison across 2benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Gemini 3.5 Flash
88
MiMo-V2-Flash
60
Verified leaderboard positions: Gemini 3.5 Flash #7 · MiMo-V2-Flash unranked
Pick Gemini 3.5 Flash 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.
Coding
+18.9 difference
Knowledge
+26.5 difference
Gemini 3.5 Flash
MiMo-V2-Flash
$1.5 / $9
$0 / $0
284.2 t/s
129 t/s
18.55s
2.14s
1M
256K
Pick Gemini 3.5 Flash 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.
Gemini 3.5 Flash is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 88 to 60. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Gemini 3.5 Flash is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.50 input / $9.00 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. Gemini 3.5 Flash gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for MiMo-V2-Flash.
Gemini 3.5 Flash is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 88 to 60. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 92.2% and 83.7%.
MiMo-V2-Flash has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 84.5 versus 58. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
MiMo-V2-Flash has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 73.4 versus 54.5. Gemini 3.5 Flash stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.