Model comparison
Gemma 4 12B vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro
Head-to-head evidence from 12 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Gemma 4 12B #137 (Estimated); MiMo-V2.5-Pro #14 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Gemma 4 12B and MiMo-V2.5-Pro share 12 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 11 results are unique to Gemma 4 12B; 19 to MiMo-V2.5-Pro.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 12
- Gemma 4 12B only
- 11
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro only
- 19
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick MiMo-V2.5-Pro if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Gemma 4 12B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 12 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 47.29. 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 256K for Gemma 4 12B.
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 | Gemma 4 12B | Δ | MiMo-V2.5-Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Gemma 4 12B77.5 | Margin← 29.5 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro48.0 |
| Agentic | Gemma 4 12BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2.5-Pro68.4 |
| Coding | Gemma 4 12BNot measured | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2.5-Pro57.2 |
| Reasoning | Gemma 4 12B43.4 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot measured |
| Math | Gemma 4 12B77.5 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot measured |
| Multimodal | Gemma 4 12B69.1 | MarginNo overlap | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot measured |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Gemma 4 12B | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Gemma 4 12BNot available | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Gemma 4 12BNot available | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Gemma 4 12BNot available | MiMo-V2.5-ProNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Gemma 4 12B256K | MiMo-V2.5-Pro1M | MiMo-V2.5-Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic14 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 12B | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 36.3% | 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
Reasoning4 benchmarks
KnowledgeGemma 4 12B wins13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 12B | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 78.8% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 78.8% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | 77.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 5.2% | 34% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| MMMLUSource | 83.4% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 22.0% | 42.2% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 75.3% | 86.6% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| AA-HLESource | 14.8% | 33.8% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -51.9% | 3.6% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 16.0% | 22.6% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 80.8% | 24.5% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
| HLESource | — | 48% | Not comparable |
| AA Openness IndexSource | — | 38.9% | Not comparable |
Math1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 12B | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME26Source | 77.5% | — | Not comparable |
Multimodal5 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Gemma 4 12B | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 73.5% | 79.9% | MiMo-V2.5-Pro leads |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Gemma 4 12B or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 70.19 to 47.29.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Gemma 4 12B or MiMo-V2.5-Pro?
Gemma 4 12B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 77.5 versus 48. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate 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.